What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee opted for the 'Vivaad se Vishwas Scheme' and filed an application. Therefore, keeping the appeal pending would serve no purpose. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A). During the hearing, the assessee expressed an intention to settle the tax litigation by opting for the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme'. The revenue had no objections.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the pendency of the appeal when the assessee intended to settle the dispute under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3), Section 250, Section 254(2)

Sunil Hingorani vs ACIT | ITAT Mumbai 2021

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Karan Lala, AR

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Menon, DR

Hearing: 11.03.2021Pronounced: 12.03.2021

O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 4 Mumbai, passed u/s. 143(3) and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

At the time hearing, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee is intend to settle the tax litigation by opting for ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Contra, the Ld. DR has no objections.

We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Since the assessee has opted for ‘Vivaad se Vishwas Scheme 2020’ as mentioned by the Ld.AR and filed the application.We are of the view that, no purpose will be served in keeping the appeal pending. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn and the assessee is given liberty to move an application u/s 254(2) of the Act to recall the present order in accordance with the provisions of law.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 12.03.2021 Sd/- Sd/- (S RIFAUR RAHMAN) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 12.03.2021 KRK, PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / Concerned CIT �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�या�पत ��त //True Copy// 1. ( Asst. Registrar)

ITAT, Mumbai Initial Date 1. Draft dictated on 10.03.21 PS 2. Draft placed before author 10.03.21 PS

3. Draft proposed & placed before PS the second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by PS Second Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the PS Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order. 11. Dictation Pad is enclosed 2. Other Member… on whi

SUNIL HINGORANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-16 (1), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments