SHRI. RAJESH JEETMAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 22(3)96), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1032/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 September 2021AY 2006-072 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 assessee's counsel requested to withdraw the appeal due to opting for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue's representative conceded to the withdrawal.

What were the facts?

The assessee preferred an appeal against the CIT(A) order for AY 2006-07. The assessee had opted for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and Form No. 3 was issued.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal should be withdrawn as the assessee had opted for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Mandri, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale, D.R
Hearing: 08.09.2021Pronounced: 08.09.2021

Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 15.10.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2006-07.

2.

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee brought to the notice of the Bench that the assessee has gone into Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and also submitted that form No.3 also has already been issued. The Ld. A.R., therefore, prayed before the Bench that appeal may kindly be allowed to be withdrawn.

4.

Accordingly, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal of the assessee.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open court on 08.09.2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →