Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI
O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: This appeal of assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)]-28, Mumbai, [in short CIT(A)], in Appeal No. CIT(A)-28/IT-493/ITO-17(1)(3)/2014-15 dated 26.05.2016. The assessment was framed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 13(2), Mumbai (in short DCIT/ AO), for the A.Y. 2011-12 vide order dated 07.02.2014 under section 143(3) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee Shri Satish Modi stated that the assessee has opted for ‘Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, 2020’. The appeal before ITAT was filed and the appeal is
After hearing both the sides and perusing the records, it is noticed that the assessee is opting for ‘Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, 2020’. In view of the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Nannusamy Mohan (HUF) vs. ACIT in I.C.A. No.372 of 2020 dated 16.10.2020, wherein Hon'ble High Court after considering the intent of the assessee to avail the benefit of ‘Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, 2020’ has dismissed the appeal by observing in Para 7 to 9 as under: - “7. As observed, the assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration to be filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall entertain the prayer without insisting upon any application to be filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appeal and on such request made by the assessee by filing a Miscellaneous Petition for Restoration, the Registry shall place such petition before the Division Bench for orders.