PUNIT K. SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO 25(2)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 693/MUM/2009Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 March 2021AY 2005-20062 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 and filed the necessary form. The assessee then requested to withdraw the appeal as the case was being settled under the scheme.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee can withdraw the appeal due to opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Kumar
For Respondent: Ms. Shreelala Pardeshi
Hearing: 18.03.2021

O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, VP: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXV, Mumbai (‘CIT(A)’ for short) in appeal no. CIT(A)- XXV/ito.25(2)(2)/IT/371/07-08 vide order dated 14.11.2008. The assessment was framed by the ITO-25(2)(2), Mumbai u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2005-06 vide his order dated 31.12.2007.

2.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel of the assessee before us stated that the assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 and for that he has filed Form No.3, received from the department and he want to withdraw the appeal as he is settling this case under this scheme.

4.

As the assessee is availing Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020, we permit him to withdraw his appeal and the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

5.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open court on 18.03.2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →