SHEETAL VIHAR CGHS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WAD - 43(5), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7452/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 September 2020AY 2015-162 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for the assessment year 2015-16. The assessee subsequently requested to withdraw the appeal, stating they had opted to settle the tax arrears under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal should be withdrawn due to the assessee opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU & BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU & BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU & SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARYSHRI SHRI

For Appellant: Shri Avdesh Bhatnagar, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, Senior DR
Hearing: 25.09

PER G.S. PANNU PER G.S. PANNU, , , , VP PER G.S. PANNU PER G.S. PANNU VP VP : VP This appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2015-16 is directed against the order of learned CIT(A), Rohtak dated 21st June, 2019.

1.

The learned counsel for the assessee, vide letter dated 7th 2. September, 2020 received through email has requested for withdrawal of the appeal filed by the assessee and stated that the assessee has opted to settle the dispute relating to the tax arrears for the assessment year under consideration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.

3.

Learned Senior DR has no objection.

2 ITA-7452/Del/2019

4.

In view of the above, we accept the request of the assessee for withdrawal of the appeal.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

Above decision was announced in the presence of both the parties on conclusion of Virtual Hearing on 25th September, 2020.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →