INCOME TAX OFFICER-32(3) (3), MUMBAI vs. SUNIL PRAVINCHANDRA JOSHI , MUMBAI

When the case was called for hearing, neither the assessee nor any of its authorised representative appeared to represent its case. However, while perusing the material before us, we find that the assessee has filed a copy of acknowledgement in Form–1 of the 2 Sunil Pravinchandra Joshi declaration filed under Vivad Se Vishwas Tax Scheme, 2020, in view of the fact that the assessee has applied for settlement of tax dispute under the Scheme.

Considered the submissions of the learned Departmental Representative and perused the material on record. As the assessee has applied for settling the dispute under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, we are of the opinion that there is no necessity of keeping this matter alive since the assessee has already applied for settlement of dispute under the Scheme. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue is liable to the dismissed as such. However, liberty is granted to the Revenue to seek restoration of this appeal in the event the application filed under Vivad Se Vishwas Tax Scheme is not accepted by the Department. It is further made clear that in such eventuality if the Revenue seeks restoration of the present appeal by filing misc. application, the delay, if any, should be condoned without insisting upon filing any application for condonation of delay. With the aforesaid observations, the appeal is dismissed.