M/S. PIONEER FOOD & AGRO INDUSTRIES,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-21(2)(5), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5204/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 February 2021AY 2009-103 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, considering the assessee's intention to utilize the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and a similar High Court decision, decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to seek restoration if the declaration was deemed void.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee intended to file a declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee's intention to opt for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD & SHRI N.K. PRADHAN

For Appellant: Ms. Mrugakshi K. Joshi, AR
For Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, DR
Hearing: 09/02/2021Pronounced: 09/02/2021

ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2009-10. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-33, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] and arises out of penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) the Income Tax Act 1961, (the ‘Act’).

2.

The Ld. counsel for the assessee submits that the appellant intends to file declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

We drew the attention of the Ld. Departmental Representative to the above submission.

2 M/s Pioneer Food & Agro Industries 3. We have heard the Ld. counsels and perused the relevant materials on record. 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 statement of the Ld. counsel 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 filed by the assessee as withdrawn. However, liberty is granted to the assessee to seek restoration of the 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 the appeal by filing miscellaneous application, the delay if any would be condoned without insisting upon filing any application for condonation of delay.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 09/02/2021.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →