MAGNAMIOUS SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE 10(2)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2658/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 March 2021AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had received settlement certificates under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals before the ITAT for AYs 2012-13 and 2014-15. The assessee later filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, to settle these matters.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SHRI RAVISH SOOD

For Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Paredeshi, D.R
Hearing: 12/03/2021Pronounced: 12/03/2021

ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M: The present appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the respective orders passed by the CIT(A)-17, Mumbai, dated 27.03.2018, which in turn arises from the assessment orders passed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3) r.w. Sec. 147 AND under Sec. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 30.11.2016 and 20.12.2017 for A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2014-15, respectively.

2.

The assessee has e-filed a letter on 17th December, 2020, wherein it is stated that it had filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 in order to settle the aforesaid matters pending before the Tribunal and have received the certificates 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 letters ‘Form 3’ issued by the designated authority for the said respective years. It is stated by the assessee that in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts the captioned appeal may allowed to be withdrawn.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 had been canvassed before us by the assessee appellant vide its aforementioned respective letters. & 2659/Mum/2018 AYs. 2012-13 & 2014-15 2 M/s Magnanimous Systems Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Range-10(2)(2)

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →