PRAFULLA_PADHAVEER SHETTY,MUMBAI vs. ITO 31(2)(5), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4994/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 February 2021AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal as they had opted for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. During the hearing, the assessee was absent but had submitted a letter stating they opted for settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020.

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The primary issue was whether the appeal could be withdrawn by the assessee due to opting for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

None

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY

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

1.

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 28-05-2019 of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-42,Mumbai for the assessment year 2014-15.

2.

When the appeal was called for hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. However, assessee has filed letter dated 04-02-2021 stating that she has opted for settling the dispute arising in the appeal under the Direct Tax Vivad

2 ITA 4994/Mum/2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →