TANMAL HANSRAJ JAIN,MUMBAI vs ITO 19 (3)(5), MUMBAI

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI RAVISH SOOD

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Menon, D.R

Hearing: 14/01/2021Pronounced: 14/01/2021

ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)- 30, Mumbai dated 25.04.2019, which in turn arises from the penalty order passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 29.2.2017 for assessment year 2009-10.

The ld. Authorised representative (for short “A.R”) for the assessee had filed a letter dated 17.12.2020 wherein its is stated that the assessee had filed the necessary declaration under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (3 of 2020) and is awaiting for a final resolution of the matter under the said scheme, pursuant whereto the captioned appeal would be withdrawn.

The ld. D.R did not raise any objection.

In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, subject to a rider that in the unlikely event of the matter not being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme the assessee shall have liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration of his appeal.

2 Tanmal Hansraj Jain Vs. ITO-19(3)(5)

TANMAL HANSRAJ JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19 (3)(5), MUMBAI