RAJENDRA MULCHAND VARMA,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), MUMBAI

ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2016-17. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-52, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] and arises out of the assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the ‘Act’).

We brought to the attention of the Ld. Departmental Representative the above submission of the appellant. 2 Rajendra Mulchand Verma 3. The Government of India enacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act No. 3 of 2020) to provide for resolution of disputed tax and for matter connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act of the Parliament received the assent of the President on 17.03.2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17.03.2020. In terms of the said Act, the assessee has been given an option to put an end to the tax disputes, which may be pending at different levels either before the First Appellate Authority or before the Tribunal or before the High Court or before the Supreme Court of India.

Considering the letter dated 04.01.2021 filed by the appellant and keeping in view the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s Nannusamy Mohan (HUF) v. ACIT (TCA No. 372 of 2020, order dated 16.10.2020), we are inclined to dismiss this appeal as withdrawn. However, liberty is granted to the assessee to seek the restoration of this appeal in the event the declaration filed under the aforesaid Act is considered void by the Department. It is further made clear, in such eventuality, if the assessee seeks restoration of this appeal by filing miscellaneous application, the delay if any would be condoned without insisting upon filing any application for condonation of delay.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 26/02/2021.