SUBODHCHANDRA GHATALIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 26 (3)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7015/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 July 2021AY 2009-102 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 noted the assessee's withdrawal letter and the receipt of certificates under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. The Revenue did not controvert this position.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against penalty orders under Section 271(1)(c) for AYs 2009-10 and 2010-11. The assessee subsequently filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, to settle these matters.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI RAVISH SOOD

For Respondent: Shri Gurbinder Singh, D.R
Hearing: 01/07/2021Pronounced: 01/07/2021

ORDER PER BENCH: The captioned appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the respective orders passed by the CIT(A)-38, Mumbai, dated 24.06.2019, which in turn arises from the penalty orders passed by the A.O under Sec.271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 27.03.2018 for A.Y. 2009-10 & A.Y. 2010-11.

2.

The assessee has e-filed a letter dated 30th March, 2021, wherein it is stated that he has filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 in order to settle the aforesaid matters pending before the Tribunal and has received the certificates under sub-section (1) of Sec. 5 of Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 from the designated authority. In support of his aforesaid claim the assessee had enclosed copies of ‘Form 3’ issued by the designated authority for both the aforementioned years. It is stated by the assessee that in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts the captioned appeals may be allowed to be withdrawn.

3.

The ld. D.R did not controvert the aforesaid factual position as was canvassed before us. & 7016/Mum/2019 A.Ys. 2009-10 & 2010-11 2 Subodhchandra Ghatalia Vs. ITO-26(3)(3) 4. In view of the above, we dismiss the appeals as withdrawn, subject to a rider that in the unlikely event of the matter not being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme the assessee shall have liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration of his appeals.

5.

Resultantly, the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn subject to the observation recorded hereinabove. Order pronounced in the open court on 01/07/2021. Sd/- Sd/- (S. Rifaur Rahman) (Ravish Sood) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 01.07.2021 PS: Rohit Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1. 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent.

3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy//

(Sr. Private Secretary)

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →