M/S PIRAMAL ENTERPRISES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT RANGE 7 (3)(2), MUMBAI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal treated the pending appeal as dismissed and withdrawn. Liberty was granted to the assessee to restore the appeal if the Vivad Se Viswas declaration is declared bad in law.
What were the facts?
The assessee preferred an appeal against the final assessment order. The assessee subsequently filed an application under the Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, 2020, to settle the tax dispute.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the impact of the assessee's declaration under the Vivad Se Viswas Scheme on the pending appeal before the Tribunal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VIRTUAL COURT
Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM
आदेश / O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY (JM):
This appeal in A.Y.2015-16 preferred by the order against the final assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 25/11/2019 u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, hereinafter referred to as Act, pursuant to the directions of the ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP in short) u/s.144C(5) of the Act dated 30/09/2019 for the A.Y.2014-15
We find that the ld. AR filed a letter mentioning that assessee had preferred an application under direct tax “Vivad Se Viswas Scheme 2020” to settle this tax dispute for the year under consideration and had obtained Form-3 from the designated authority thereon, copy of which was enclosed alongwith this letter.
In view of this, we hereby treat the appeal pending before us as dismissed and withdrawn with a liberty given to the assessee to get the appeal restored in the event that assessee’s declaration made under “Vivad Se Viswas Scheme 2020” is declared bad in law in future for any reason whatsoever.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 12/02/2021.
More judgments on Section 144C(13)
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Autoform Sales Gmbh, Hyderabad vs ADIT (International Taxation) - 1, HyderabadITA 486/HYD/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Autoform Sales Gmbh, Hyderabad vs ADIT (International Taxation) - 1, HyderabadITA 498/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 2128/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 4558/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026