GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. ADDL DIT (IT) 3, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed both the assessee's and the revenue's appeals as withdrawn. This dismissal was subject to the condition that if the matter was not resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme, both parties would have the liberty to seek restoration of their appeals.
What were the facts?
The assessee and revenue filed appeals against an order for assessment year 2007-08. The assessee declared the matter under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, and was awaiting resolution.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the pendency of the appeals due to the assessee's declaration under the Vivad se Vishwas Act, leading to a mutual agreement for withdrawal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI ‘I’ BENCH, MUMBAI
Page 2 of 2 ORDER Per Bench:-
These appeals, filed by the assessee as well as revenue, call into question the correctness of the order dated 30.01.2012, passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-15, Mumbai in the matter of assessment u/s.144C(3) r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2007-08.
When these appeals were called out for hearing, the ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that he has filed the necessary declaration under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) and is awaiting for final resolution of the matter under the said scheme. He submitted that upon completion of the necessary formalities, he will withdraw his appeal. In response to the suggestion from the Bench, he fairly accepted that he has no objection to the appeal being dismissed as withdrawn as long as his right for revival of the appeal are protected, in the event of, for some unforeseen reason, the matter being not settled under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. 3. The ld. DR also agreed that the appeal of the revenue may also be dismissed as withdrawn with similar right of revival of the appeal. 4. In view of the above, we dismiss these appeals as withdrawn, subject to the rider that in the unlikely event of matter not being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme, both assessee and revenue shall have liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration of their respective appeals. 5. In the result, these appeals are dismissed as withdrawn – subject to the observation above. Pronounced in the open court today on the 14 January, 2021.
More judgments on Section 144C(3)
- Radhakishan Potharajula, Karim Nagar vs ITO (Int Taxn)-2, HyderabadITA 2340/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Neha Hiranand Motwani, Nashik vs ITO International Tax, NashikITA 1570/PUN/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- ACIT-Circle 6(1)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited, MumbaiITA 7767/MUM/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- ACIT-Circle6(1)(1) Mumbai., Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited, MumbaiITA 7766/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Atc Tires Private Limited, Mumbai vs The Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 6468/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Shadab Malik vs. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersAllahabad · 26 Oct 2026
- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026