ITO 24(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. ANUSHREE KHETAN, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6762/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 January 2021AY 2005-063 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's submission regarding the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Citing a Madras High Court decision, the Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for the assessment year 2005-06. The assessee had filed an application under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for the said assessment year.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee's application under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI N.K. PRADHAN

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita Shah, AR
For Respondent: Mr. Brajendra Kumar, DR, Ms. Vinita Shah, AR
Hearing: 14/01/2021

ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The relevant assessment year is 2005-06. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] and arises out of the assessment completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 the Income Tax Act 1961, (the ‘Act’).

2.

The Ld. counsel for the Respondent submits that the assessee has filed application under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for above assessment year and Form 3 is awaited. 2 Smt. Anushree Khetan

We brought to the attention of the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) the above submission of the assessee.

3.

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 submissions of the Ld. counsel for the assessee 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 appellant 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 appellant 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.

3 Smt. Anushree Khetan

4.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed, subject to the observation above.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 14/01/2021.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →