ITO 19 (3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHRI. RAJESH B BOHRA, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4967/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 February 2021AY 2009-102 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's declaration under the Vivad se Vishwas Act for dispute settlement. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2009-10. The assessee did not appear for the hearing but submitted a declaration under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, to settle the dispute.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee's settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY

For Appellant: Smt. Smita Verma (DR)
Pronounced: 03/02/2021

Date of hearing 03-02-2021 Date of Pronouncement 03/02/2021 O R D E R

Per Saktijit Dey, JM

1.

This is an appeal by the revenue against the order dated 07-05-2019 of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Mumbai for the assessment year 2009-10.

2.

When the appeal was called for hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. However, the assessee has filed letter dated 02-02-2021 stating that he has made declaration under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 for 2 ITA 4967/Mum/2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →