METROPOLITAN CLEARING CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX WARD NUMBER-10(2)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6268/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 March 2021AY 2013-142 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to seek restoration if the settlement failed.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. The assessee received a certificate in 'Form 3' under the Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.

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 “D” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD & SHRI N.K. PRADHAN

For Appellant: Shri Ashok J. Patil, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale, D.R
Hearing: 26/02/2021Pronounced: 01/03/2021

ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-17, 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 09.02.2016 for assessment year 2013-14.

2.

The counsel for the assessee has filed a letter on 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 and has received the certificate in ‘Form 3’ 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 It is stated by the counsel that in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts the captioned appeal may allowed to be withdrawn.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 M/s Metropolitan Clearing Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward No. 10(2)(2)

More judgments on Section 5

All 847 judgments and leading authorities on Section 5 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →