SAI EVEREST BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 22(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2701/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 September 2021AY 2013-143 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal as they had applied for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to seek restoration if the scheme application was not accepted.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal and a cross-objection against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2013-14. The assessee subsequently opted to settle the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be withdrawn due to settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act. The procedure for restoration of the appeal if the settlement fails.

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, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala
Hearing: 16/09/2021Pronounced: 16/09/2021

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No.2701/Mum/2019
C.O. No.62/Mum/2020

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

C.O. No.62/Mum/2020 A.Y.2013-14 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH (JM): 1. The present appeal filed by the assessee as well as cross-objection filed by the assessee are against the common order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-34, Mumbai (in Short ‘CIT(A)’) for the A.Y. 2013- 14 dated 19.03.2019 and arises out of assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act).

2.

At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that assessee has preferred to settle the issue under Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and relevant information is filed vide letter dated 14.09.2021 and submitted that it has filed the necessary declaration under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) and confirmed the receipt of Form-3.

3.

The Ld. DR also did not object to course so suggested.

4.

Heard the learned Counsels for both the parties and perused material on record. Considering the fact that the assessee has sought withdrawal of the present appeal, as it has applied for settling the dispute under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, we permit the assessee to withdraw the appeal at this stage. However, liberty is granted to the assessee to seek restoration of this appeal in the event the application filed under Vivad Se Vishwas Tax Scheme is not accepted by the Department. It is further made clear that in such eventuality if the assessee seeks restoration of the present appeal by filing misc. application, the delay, if any, should be condoned without insisting upon filing any application for condonation of delay. This is in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in order dated 16th October 2020, delivered in M/s. Nannusamy Mohan (HUF) v/s ACIT, TCA

C.O. No.62/Mum/2020 A.Y.2013-14 no.372 of 2020. With the aforesaid observations, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →