ACIT 2(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. MAHINDRA TRUCKS & BUSES LTH. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MAHINDRA NAVISTAR AUTOMOTIVES LTD), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2904/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 July 2021AY 2007-083 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal noted that the assessee had applied for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme and the Revenue did not object. Therefore, the tribunal found no necessity to keep the appeal alive.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee informed the tribunal that they had applied for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Tax Scheme, 2020, and requested an adjournment.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's application for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

For Appellant: Shri Viral Shah
For Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhle, Shri Viral Shah

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Revenue challenging the order dated 11th February 2019, passed by the learned CIT(A)–5, Mumbai, for the assessment year 2007–08.

2.

While going through the record available before us, we find that the assessee has filed a letter dated 5th January 2021, intimating that 2 Teerth Mercantile Pvt. Ltd.

the assessee has applied for settling the tax dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Tax Scheme, 2020, and hence sought adjournment.

3.

The learned Departmental Representative did not object to the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee.

4.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. Considering the fact that the assessee has applied for settlement of the tax dispute under VSVS, we are of the opinion that there is no necessity keeping the matter alive. The learned Departmental Representative has also not objected to the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee or the contents of the aforesaid letter filed by the assessee. Consequently, we deem it fit and appropriate to treat the Revenue’s appeal as dismissed in terms indicated above.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →