ACIT- 27 (3), MUMBAI vs. VIKAS TESTING & DEVELOPMENT LABORATORY, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that no purpose would be served in keeping the appeal pending as the assessee opted for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The assessee intended to settle tax litigation by opting for the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020' and had received Form 5 under the scheme. The Assessing Officer had no objections.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the pendency of the appeal when the assessee chose to settle the tax dispute under a specific scheme.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI
O R D E R
PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM:
The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, Mumbai passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
At the time hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee, we find that the assessee has submitted a letter dated 11 September 2021 mentioning that the M/s Vikas Testing & Devp Laboratory, Mumbai assessee intend to settle the tax litigation by opting for ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020’ (VSVS2020) and received Form 5 under VSVS Rules 2020. Contra, the Ld. DR has no objections.
We heard the Ld. DR and perused the material on record. Since the assessee has opted for ‘Vivaad se Vishwas Scheme 2020’ and received Form-5 from the income tax department. We are of the view that, no purpose will be served in keeping the appeal pending. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn and the assessee is given liberty to move an application u/s 254(2) of the Act to recall the present order as per provisions of Law.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026