BAJAJ HINDUSTHAN SUGAR LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 3|(1)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 922/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 March 2021AY 2011-122 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had settled the dispute under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to restore it if the settlement failed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT. Subsequently, the assessee filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, to settle the matter and received a certificate from the designated authority.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. The applicability and effect of the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 on pending appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 5

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B” MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Gajendra, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen, D.R
Hearing: 04/03/2021Pronounced: 04/03/2021

ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-8, Mumbai, which in turn arises from the assessment order passed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 27.03.2015 for assessment year 2011-12.

2.

The assessee has filed a letter dated 19th February, 2021, 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 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 It is stated by the assessee that in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts the captioned appeal may allowed to be withdrawn.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 Bajaj Hindustan Sugar Limited Vs. DCIT, Range 3(1)(1)

More judgments on Section 5

All 847 judgments and leading authorities on Section 5 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →