THE DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. ICICI BANK LTD (ERSTWHILE ANGRAM FINANCE LTD), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6999/MUM/2007Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 February 2021AY 1996-19972 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal as withdrawn, noting the assessee's settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to seek restoration if the settlement was not finalized.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order arising from a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c). The assessee requested withdrawal of the appeal as they had filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, to settle the matter.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be withdrawn due to the assessee's settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.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 “C” MUMBAI

For Respondent: Shri V. Sreekar, D.R
Hearing: 23/02/2021Pronounced: 23/02/2021

ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M: The present appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)- XXVII, Mumbai, dated 30.08.2007, 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 31.03.2006 for assessment year 1996-97.

2.

The ld. Authorised representative (for short “A.R”) for the assessee has e-filed a letter dated 12th February, 2021, 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. In support of his aforesaid claim the ld. A.R had stated that “Form 3” has been issued to the assessee by the designated authority (copy placed on record). It is stated by the assessee that in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts the captioned appeal filed by the revenue may be directed to be withdrawn.

3.

The ld. D.R did not controvert the aforesaid factual position as was canvassed before us.

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 →