Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI RAVISH SOOD
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.
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 It is stated by the assessee that in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts the captioned appeal may allowed to be withdrawn.
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)
In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, subject to a rider that in the unlikely event of the matter not being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme the assessee shall have liberty to approach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.
Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn subject to the observation recorded hereinabove. Order pronounced in the open court on 10/03/2021.