ELEZZ CONSULTANTS MUMBAI PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(2)(2), MUMBAI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's submission regarding the Vivad se Vishwas Act. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT for the assessment year 2011-12. The assessee subsequently filed a declaration under the Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, and received a certificate. The assessee requested the appeal be treated as withdrawn.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal should be withdrawn due to the assessee opting for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY & SHRI N.K. PRADHAN
ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2011-12. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] and arises out of the assessment completed u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the ‘Act’).
The assessee/appellant has filed a letter dated 04/03/2021 before the Tribunal stating that they have filed the declaration u/s.4 of the Direct Tax 2 Elezz Consultants Mumbai Pvt.Ltd. Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 and certificate u/s.5(1) in Form-3, dated 08/02/2021 has been received. Thus, it is stated that the captioned appeal be treated as withdrawn.
We brought to the attention of the Ld. Departmental Representative the above submission of the appellant.
The Government of India enacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act No. 3 of 2020) to provide for resolution of disputed tax and for matter connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act of the Parliament received the assent of the President on 17.03.2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17.03.2020. In terms of the said Act, the assessee has been given an option to put an end to the tax disputes, which may be pending at different levels either before the First Appellate Authority or before the Tribunal or before the High Court or before the Supreme Court of India.
Considering the letter dated 04.03.2021 filed by the appellant, we are inclined to dismiss this appeal as withdrawn.
In the result, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 10/03/2021
More judgments on Section 4
- Prakash Dayaram Chandnani, Rajkot vs ITO Ward 2(1)(1), RajkotITA 927/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Hiteshkumar Mohanlal Desai, Daman vs The Assessment Unit, ITO, Daman Ward, DamanITA 962/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Hiteshkumar Mohanlal Desai, Daman vs The Assessment Unit, ITO, Daman Ward, DamanITA 962/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Ratilal Manubhai Dhanani, Amreli vs ITO WD 3(1)(4), AmreliITA 697/RJT/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Ratilal Manubhai Dhanani, Amreli vs ITO WD 3(1)(4), AmreliITA 697/RJT/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026