Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SHRI RAVISH SOOD
ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-54, 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 28.03.2014 for assessment year 2011-12.
The ld. Authorised representative (for short “A.R”) for the assessee at the very outset of the hearing of the appeal submitted that the assessee appellant had filed an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 in order to settle the aforesaid matter pending before the Tribunal. In support of his aforesaid claim it was submitted by the ld. A.R that the assessee had submitted Form No. 1 and 2 under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 on 02.02.2021. It was, thus, submitted by the ld. A.R. that in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts the captioned appeal may allowed to be withdrawn.
The ld. D.R did not controvert the aforesaid factual position as was canvassed before us.
In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, subject to a rider that in the unlikely event of the matter not being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme the assessee shall have liberty to approach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 its appeal.
2 M/s Supermax International Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-38 (now DCIT, CC-6(3)