SHAILESH SHARMA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 21 (3)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5931/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2021AY 2010-112 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A) order for AY 2010-11. The assessee sought to withdraw the appeal as they had opted to settle the dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee can withdraw an appeal after opting for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “H”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI M. BALAGANESH

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Bandi (AR)
For Respondent: Shri Gurbinder Singh (DR)
Hearing: 05/05/2021Pronounced: 05/05/2021

O R D E R

PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM

1.

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 22.07.2019 of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 33, Mumbai for the assessment year 2010-11.

2.

When the appeal was called for hearing, the learned Authorized Representative of the assesse sought withdrawal of the appeals as the assessee has opted for settling the dispute arising in the present appeal under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 and has also received certificate issued by the designated authority in Form 3. A letter dated 30.04.2021 to this effect attaching a copy of form 3 has also been filed before the Bench. The learned Departmental Representative has no objection to assessee’s request for withdrawal of the appeal. Assessment Year: 2010-11 3. In view of facts discussed above and considering the assessee’s request, we permit the assessee to withdraw this appeal. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

4.

In the result, appeal is dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →