What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, acknowledging the assessee's intention to settle the matter under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. The assessee was granted liberty to seek restoration if the settlement failed.

The assessee firm filed an appeal against the assessment order for AY 2015-16. During the hearing, the Departmental Representative informed the tribunal that the assessee had filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for a settlement scheme.

K Mehta & Co. vs ACIT | ITAT Mumbai 2021

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR & SHRI RAVISH SOOD

For Respondent: Shri. Gurbinder Singh, D.R

Hearing: 17/06/2021Pronounced: 17/06/2021

ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M: The present appeal filed by the assessee firm is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-44, Mumbai, which in turn arises from the assessment order passed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 09.11.2017 for assessment year 2015-16.

Shri. Gurbinder Singh, the ld. Departmental Representative (for short “D.R”) at the very outset of the hearing of the appeal submitted that he has been intimated in writing by the assessee that it has filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 in order to settle the aforesaid matter pending before the Tribunal.

In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, subject to a rider that in the unlikely event of the matter not being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme the assessee shall have liberty to approach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 its appeal.

K. Mehta & Co. Vs. ACIT – Circle 32(2), Mumbai

K MEHTA & CO.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE- 32 (2), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments