Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
This appeal by assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-52, Mumbai [in short CIT(A)] in Appeal No. CIT (A)-52/IT- 578/DC-CC-4(1)/2016-17 vide order dated 31.10.2018. The assessment was framed by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai (in short DCIT) under section 143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year 2015-16 vide his order dated 30.12.2016.
At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee, Charmi Shroff filed an adjournment petition stating that the assessee has filed Form No. 1 & 2 before the designated authority under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and qua this assessee has made a mention in adjournment petition dated 11.01.2020. The same reads as under:
When this facts were confronted to ld. CIT-DR, he stated that the Tribunal can take decision.
In view of the above, after hearing both the sides and going through the facts, we dismiss this appeal as withdrawn, subject to assessee’s right for revival of the appeal in case due to some unforeseen reasons, the matter is not settled under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. The assessee is at liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration of his appeal in that event. This issue is settled by Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s Nannusamy Mohan (HUF) vs. ACIT (TCA No. 372 of 2920, order dated 16.10.2020) wherein on identical circumstances, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. Respectfully following the Hon’ble Madrash High Court in the case of M/s Nannusamy Mohan (HUF) vs. ACIT (supra), we dismissed the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.
Order pronounced in the open court on 12.01.2021