MRS. MANJULA JAGDISH PATIL,MUMBAI vs. ITO 26 (2)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 513/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 July 2021AY 2011-122 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and had received the necessary acknowledgement. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an assessment order. Subsequently, the assessee submitted a declaration under the Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, and confirmed receipt of Form-3, requesting withdrawal of the appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee's participation in the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

For Respondent: Mr. Bharat Andhale, DR
Hearing: 27/07/2021Pronounced: 27/07/2021

ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M. The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-38, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year 2011-12 dated 22.12.2018 and arises out of assessment completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act).

2.

At the outset, when the appeal was called out for hearing, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of calls. Vide letter dated 10.03.2021, assessee 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 and prayer to withdraw the appeal.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →