ARCHANA JOLLY MATHUR,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 21(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3103/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 June 2021AY 2013-142 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and the Revenue representative conceded to the withdrawal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2013-14. The assessee did not appear but requested to withdraw the appeal as they had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the assessee's appeal should be withdrawn due to opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, D.R
Hearing: 29.06.2021Pronounced: 29.06.2021

Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 14.02.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2013-14.

2.

None has appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, the assessee filed a letter dated 25.02.2021 requesting the Bench to allow the assessee to voluntarily withdraw the appeal as the assessee has gone into Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and also submitted that form No.3 also has already been issued.

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In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.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 29.06.2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →