What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee requested to withdraw the appeal as the dispute was settled under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. The Departmental Representative had no objection to this request.

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2011-12. The assessee had opted to settle the dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 and received the designated authority's Form No.3.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal could be withdrawn by the assessee due to opting for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.

Baijnath Nagarmal Rungta vs ITO | ITAT Mumbai 2021

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY

For Appellant: Shri Jishan Jain (AR)

For Respondent: Smt. Smita Verma (DR)

Pronounced: 04/02/2021

Date of hearing 04-02-2021 Date of Pronouncement 04/02/2021 O R D E R

Per Saktijit Dey, JM

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 15-03-2019 of learned Commissioner (Appeals)-29,Mumbai for the assessment year 2011-12.

Shri Jishan Jain, the learned Authorised Representative submitted, assessee had opted for settling the dispute arising in this appeal under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. Further, he submitted, Form No.3 issued by the designated authority has also been received by the assessee. Therefore, he requested for 2 ITA 2600/Mum/2019 withdrawal of the appeal. In fact, letter dated 03-02-2021 has also been received from the assessee making similar request for withdrawal of the appeal. The learned Departmental Representative has no objection to the aforesaid request of the assessee.

In view of the facts discussed above, I permit the assessee to withdraw its appeal. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

BAIJNATH NAGARMAL RUNGTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 21 (1)(2), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments