ANIL KESHORAM SINGHAL,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(3)(1), NAVI MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 787/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 February 2021AY 2006-073 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The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting the assessee liberty to revive it if the Vivad se Vishwas scheme settlement fails. The Tribunal also clarified that no condonation of delay would be required if the appeal is restored due to issues with the scheme.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. During the hearing, the assessee's representative did not appear, but a letter was submitted stating the assessee had filed a declaration under the Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, and requested to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for the Vivad se Vishwas scheme and the conditions for revival of the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH&

Hearing: 25/01/2021Pronounced: 10/02/2021

आदेश / O R D E R

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 06.11.2015 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 26, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT (A)”] relevant to A.Y. 2006-07.

2.

At the outset, when the appeal was called out for hearing, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of calls. It was brought to our notice letter dated 03.02.2021 that assessee has filed the necessary declaration under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020). Vide said letter, he confirmed the receipt of Form- 1 & 2 and prayer to withdraw the appeal. He prayed that its right for revival of the appeal is Shri Anil Keshoram Singhal protected, in the event of, for some unfortunate reason, the matter being not settled under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme.

3.

The Ld. DR did not object to course so suggested.

4.

Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We notice that assessee filed the letter for withdrawal. Accordingly, liberty is granted to the assessee to revive the appeals in the event application filed by the assessee under VSVS fails to mature. It is further made clear that if the assessee /appellant seeks to restore the appeal in the event assessee's declaration made under VSVS is not accepted, the Registry shall not insist for filing of application for condonation of delay, if the Miscellaneous Application for recalling the order is filed beyond time on account of delay in communication of outcome under VSVS. [ Re. M/s. Nannusamy Mohan(HUF) vs. ACIT in T.C.A No.372 of 2020 decided on 16/10/2020 by Hon'ble Madras High Court]. 5. In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, subject to the rider that in the unlikely event of matter not being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme, the assessee shall have liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration of its appeal.

6.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn – subject to the observation above.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →