What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for the VSVS2020 and filed the necessary application. Therefore, keeping the appeal pending would serve no purpose. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the CIT(A). At the time of hearing, no one appeared for the assessee. The assessee had opted for the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020' (VSVS2020).

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be kept pending when the assessee has opted for a tax settlement scheme. The applicability and implications of the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020' on pending appeals.

Manika Moulds Private Limited vs DCIT | ITAT Mumbai 2021

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE: The appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – Manika Moulds Pvt. Ltd.. - 2 - 17, Mumbai, passed u/s. 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

At the time hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. The assessee has filed a letter dated 09.12.2020 that the assessee is intend to settle the tax litigation by opting for ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020’(VSVS2020) and filed an application in Form No. 1 & 2 under VSVS Rules 2020. Contra, the Ld. DR has no objections.

We heard the Ld.DR and perused the material on record. Since the assessee has opted for ‘Vivaad se Vishwas Scheme 2020’ and has filed a letter dated 09.12.2020 mentioning that the assessee has applied under VSVS 2020 and received Form-3 from the Income Tax Department. We are of the view that, no purpose will be served in keeping the appeal pending. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn and the assessee is given liberty to move an application u/s 254(2) of the Act to recall the present order in accordance with the provisions of law.

Manika Moulds Pvt. Ltd.. - 3 - 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17.02.2021.

Sd/- Sd/- (M. BALAGANESH) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 17.02.2021 AK, PS आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / Concerned CIT िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�यािपत �ित //True Copy// 1. उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai

2. Other Member…

MANIKA MOULDS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT 10(2)(2), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments