PIPAL RESEARCH ANALYTICS AND INFORMATION SERVICES INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(2)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2217/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 January 2021AY 2010-113 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 noted the assessee's application under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and, following a High Court precedent, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to seek restoration if the declaration under the scheme is deemed void.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income Tax Act. The assessee subsequently filed a letter stating they had applied under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn when the assessee opts for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “K” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY & SHRI N.K. PRADHAN

For Appellant: Mr. Kiresh Shivkar, AR
For Respondent: Mr. Sunil Deshpande/
Hearing: 20/01/2021Pronounced: 20/01/2021

ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax – 15 (2) (2) passed u/s 143 (3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).

2.

The Ld. counsel for the appellant has filed a letter dated 19.01.2021 stating that they have filed an application under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for captioned year. 2 Pipal Research Analytics and Information Services India P. Ltd. We brought to the attention of the Ld. Departmental Representative the above submission of the appellant.

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 letter dated 19.01.2021 filed by the appellant 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 as withdrawn. However, liberty is granted to the assessee to seek the restoration of this 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 this 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 is dismissed as withdrawn, subject to the observation above. 3 Pipal Research Analytics and Information Services India P. Ltd. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20/01/2021.

More judgments on Section 144C

All 3,699 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →