SHRI ABHISHEK BANSAL,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-27(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4765/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 January 2021AY 2015-163 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The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, acknowledging the assessee's settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to seek restoration if the declaration is deemed void.

What were the facts?

The assessee opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and received a Form 5 (Order for full and final settlement). The appeal was filed against a penalty levied under Section 271B.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for settlement of tax disputes.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271B

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 Respondent: Mr. Brajendra Kumar, DR
Hearing: 14/01/2021

ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2015-16. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] and arises out of the penalty levied u/s 271B the Income Tax Act 1961, (the ‘Act’).

2.

The Ld. counsel for the appellant has filed a letter dated 22.12.2020 stating that the assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and accordingly has received Form 5 (Order for full and final settlement) from the Commissioner of Income Tax.

We brought to the attention of the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) the above submissions of the appellant.

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 dated 22.12.2020 of the Ld. counsel for 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.

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

More judgments on Section 271B

All 1,993 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →