NIKITA SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(2)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4954/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 March 2021AY 2014-152 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, acknowledging the settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. A rider was added allowing restoration if the settlement fails.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order. The assessee subsequently filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, to settle the matter.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be withdrawn due to settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI RAVISH SOOD

For Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen, D.R
Hearing: 10/03/2021Pronounced: 10/03/2021

ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-30, Mumbai, which in turn arises from the penalty order passed by the A.O under Sec. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 30.06.2017 for assessment year 2014-15.

2.

The assessee’s counsel has e-filed a letter, wherein it is stated that the assessee had filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 in order to settle the aforesaid matter pending before the Tribunal and has received the certificate 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 letter ‘Form 3’ issued by the designated authority. It is stated by the assessee that in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts the captioned appeal may allowed to be withdrawn.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 was canvassed before us.

2 Nikita Shah Vs. ITO, Ward-19(2)(4)

4.

In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, subject to a rider that in the unlikely event of the matter not being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme the assessee shall have liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration of its appeal.

5.

Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn subject to the observation recorded hereinabove. Order pronounced in the open court on 10/03/2021.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →