HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2663/MUM/2012Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 October 2021AY 2008-094 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal treated the pending cross-appeals as dismissed and withdrawn. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the Vivad Se Vishwas declaration is later declared invalid.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 to settle tax disputes for multiple assessment years. The assessee had already paid the due taxes under this scheme.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the settlement of tax disputes under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and its impact on pending appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘H‘ BENCH

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI M.BALAGANESH

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Sathe
For Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj
Hearing: 04/10/2021Pronounced: 04/10/2021

Heard together (3 matters)

CO No.220/Mum/2014
ITA No.4802/Mum/2013
ITA No.7551/Mum/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश / O R D E R PER BENCH:

1.

These cross appeals in CO No.220/Mum/2014, ITA No.7339/Mum/2016, ITA No.2673/Mum/2012, ITA No.4802/Mum/2013, ITA No.4435/Mum/2016, ITA No.7551/Mum/2016, ITA No.2325/Mum/2017 & ITA No.6093/Mum/2017 for A.Y.2008-09 to 2013-14 respectively arise out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1 / 2 respectively Mumbai in appeal Nos.CIT(A)-I/IT-702/2010-11, CIT(A)-I/IT- 132/2011-12, CIT(A)-2/IT-85/2012-13, CIT(A)/IT 2A/2014-15, CIT(A)- 2/IT-279/2014-15 & CIT(A)-2/IT-06/2016-17 dated 15/02/2012, 31/03/2013, 09/03/2016, 31/08/2016, 30/12/2016 & 26/07/2017 respectively (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act)

M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., dated 16/11/2010, 23/12/2011, 15/02/2013, 28/02/2014, 02/02/2015 & 07/03/2016 by the ld. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range 1(1) / ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO).

2.

We find that the ld. Counsel for the assessee Ms. Aarti Sathe submitted that assessee filed a letter dated 30/09/2021 mentioning that an application had been preferred under direct tax “Vivad Se Viswas Scheme 2020” to settle these tax disputes for the years under consideration and had obtained Form-3 from the designated authority thereon, copy of which was enclosed alongwith this letter. She also stated that due taxes for all the years had already been paid by the assessee under „Vivad se Vishwas Scheme‟ 2020.

3.

In view of this, we hereby treat the cross appeals pending before us as dismissed and withdrawn with a liberty given to both the parties to get the appeals restored in the event that assessee‟s declaration made under “Vivad Se Viswas Scheme 2020” is declared bad in law in future for any reason whatsoever.

4.

In the result, appeals and cross objection of the assessee and Revenue are dismissed as withdrawn.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →