Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming additions made by the AO under Section 69A and 69C for AY 2016-17. The additions were for unexplained income from sale of shares treated as LTCG and estimated commission for accommodation entries.
Held
The assessee requested to withdraw the appeal as they had opted for the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 and had received approval. The Revenue had no objection.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal can be withdrawn by the assessee on opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024.
Sections Cited
147, 69A, 69C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR & SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR
"ी टी.आर. से""ल कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मकरंद वसंत महादेवकर, लेखा सद" के सम"। ] ] BEFORE SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं / Year : 2016-17 Kamlesh P. Shah (HUF) The Assistant Commissioner बनाम/ C/o. Riddhi Tele - of Income Tax v/s. Communication ITO Ward-1(2) Balkrishna Complex Bhavnagar Vora Bazar Bhavnagar – 364 001 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AAHHK 6103 R (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sarju Mehta, AR Revenue by : Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 26 /02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 27 /02/2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, AM:
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”], dated 27.12.2023, for the Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17, wherein the CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred to as “AO”] under Section 69A and Section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”]. Kamlesh P.Shah (HUF) vs. ACIT Asst. Year : 2016-17
The AO, in the reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act, made an addition of Rs.93,84,364/- under Section 69A of the Act, treating the Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) from the sale of shares of Yamini Investment Co. Ltd. as unexplained income, on the ground that the transaction was a pre- arranged price manipulation scheme. Additionally, an estimated 5% commission of Rs.4,69,218/- was added under Section 69C of the Act, assuming the amount was paid to obtain accommodation entries. The CIT(A) upheld the additions, holding that the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of transactions and the identity of counterparties.
The assessee challenged the additions on the grounds that all transactions were conducted through recognized stock exchanges, supported by valid documentary evidence, including contract notes, demat account statements, and banking transactions. The assessee further contended that the AO denied cross-examination of the persons whose statements were relied upon, violating principles of natural justice.
During the course of hearing before us, the assessee submitted a digitally signed letter dated 21.02.2025, stating that he had opted for the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 and had received Form No. 2 from the Income Tax Authority, approving his application. The assessee also submitted the copy of challan of payment of taxes as per the scheme. The assessee, therefore, requested to withdraw the appeal pending before the Tribunal.
The Departmental Representative (DR) raised no objection to the withdrawal of the appeal. Kamlesh P.Shah (HUF) vs. ACIT Asst. Year : 2016-17
Considering the request of the assessee and the no objection from the Revenue, we find no reason to adjudicate the matter on merits.