SMT. RUCHIKA S HALWASIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 17(3)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4951/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 March 2021AY 2010-112 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, noting that the assessee had settled the matter under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. A rider was added allowing restoration if the settlement failed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order under Section 271(1)(c). The assessee subsequently filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, to settle the matter.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.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 “D” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD & SHRI N.K. PRADHANSmt. Ruchika S. Halwasia

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)-28, Mumbai, 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 27.06.2018 for assessment year 2010-11.

2.

The assessee has filed a letter dated 10th February, 2021, wherein it is stated that she 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. It is stated by the assessee that in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts the captioned appeal may allowed to be withdrawn.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.

4.

In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, subject to a rider that in the unlikely event of the matter not being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme the assessee shall have liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration of her appeal.

2 Smt. Ruchika S. Halwasia Vs. ITO-17(3)-2

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 →