NIRMALA DEVI JAMMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-21(4), NEW DELHI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal decided to consign the appeal to records and treat it as dismissed, subject to the condition that if the dispute is not resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas Act, the assessee can seek reinstitution of the appeal.
What were the facts?
The assessee opted to settle tax arrears for AY 2011-12 under The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, and filed the necessary declaration. The appeal was filed by the assessee.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the impact of the assessee opting for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act on the pending appeal before the Tribunal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH FRIDAY BENCH A: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA
PER G.S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT
This appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2011-12 is directed against the order of learned CIT(A),-7, New Delhi dated 31.5.2019
In the captioned appeal, the appellant assessee has informed that the assessee has opted to settle the dispute relating to the tax arrears for the assessment year under consideration under The Direct Tax Vivad se ITA 6458/Del/2019 Assessment year 2011-12 Vishwas Act, 2020. It has been stated that the necessary declaration in accordance with Section 4 of The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 has been filed by the assessee.
Considering the aforesaid situation, the captioned appeal is consigned to records and treated as dismissed.
However, the aforesaid is subject to a caveat that in case the dispute relating to tax arrears for the captioned assessment year is not ultimately resolved in terms of the aforestated Act, the appellant (i.e., the assessee) shall be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for reinstitution of the appeal and the Tribunal shall consider such application appropriately as per law. The respondent (i.e., the Revenue) has no objection with regard to the aforesaid caveat.
In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is consigned to record and, for statistical purposes, is treated as dismissed.
Above decision was announced on conclusion of Virtual Hearing on 28th August, 2020.
More judgments on Section 4
- Prakash Dayaram Chandnani, Rajkot vs ITO Ward 2(1)(1), RajkotITA 927/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Hiteshkumar Mohanlal Desai, Daman vs The Assessment Unit, ITO, Daman Ward, DamanITA 962/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Hiteshkumar Mohanlal Desai, Daman vs The Assessment Unit, ITO, Daman Ward, DamanITA 962/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Ratilal Manubhai Dhanani, Amreli vs ITO WD 3(1)(4), AmreliITA 697/RJT/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Ratilal Manubhai Dhanani, Amreli vs ITO WD 3(1)(4), AmreliITA 697/RJT/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026