MEHTA INFOCOM PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 12 (3)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8055/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 June 2021AY 2009-102 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had settled the matter under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c). The assessee subsequently filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, to settle the matter. A certificate was received from the designated authority under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.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 “F” MUMBAI

For Respondent: Shri Gurbinder Singh, D.R
Hearing: 08/06/2021Pronounced: 08/06/2021

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 imposing penalty under Sec. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 21.03.2018 for assessment year 2009-10.

2.

The assessee’s counsel has placed on record letter stating that the assessee company had filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 in order to settle the aforesaid matter pending before the Tribunal and has received the certificate under sub-section (1) of Sec. 5 of Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 from the designated authority. In support of its aforesaid claim the assessee had enclosed alongwith its letter ‘Form 3’ issued by the designated authority. It is stated by the assessee that in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts the captioned appeal may allowed to be withdrawn.

3.

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

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 →