HATKESH CHEMICALS PHARMACEUTICALS PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 12 (2)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 420/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 June 2021AY 2010-112 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The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, allowing the assessee to withdraw it due to the settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. The assessee was granted liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration if the settlement failed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the CIT(A) arising from an order under Section 271(1)(c). The assessee had filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, to settle the matter.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the withdrawal of the appeal by the assessee due to 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

For Appellant: Shri. Akshay
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 is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-20, Mumbai, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O under Sec. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 20.04.2018 for assessment year 2010-11.

2.

The ld. Authorised Representative (for short “A.R”) for the assessee at the very outset of the hearing of the appeal submitted that as the assessee had filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 in order to settle the aforesaid matter pending before the Tribunal, therefore, as instructed, the captioned appeal may be allowed to be withdrawn.

3.

The ld. D.R did not controvert the aforesaid factual position as was canvassed before us.

4.

In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, subject to a rider that in the unlikely event of the matter not being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme the assessee shall have liberty to approach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

2 Hatkesh Chemicals Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO 12(2)(3), Mumbai

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 →