SHRI REGHPATHY ANNAMALAI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NCC - 16, CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal considered the assessee's submission of having obtained Form No. 3 under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and seeking withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A) order for AY 2015-16. During the hearing, the assessee expressed a desire to utilize the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020' to settle the dispute.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN
आदेश/ O R D E R
PER S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
The assessee filed this appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 4, Chennai in ITA No. 91/2017-
:- 2 -: ITA No: 3318/Chny/2019 18/AY 2015-16/CIT(A)-4 dated 30.09.2019 for the assessment year 2015- 16.
The above case was heard through video conferencing. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee invited our attention to the letter dated 18.03.2021 and submitted that the assessee wanted to utilize the Direct Taxes ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020’ to settle pending dispute relating to Direct Taxes and in this regard the assessee has filed Form No. 1 and Form 2 and obtained Form No. 3 from the designated authority.
The Bench has considered the material. Since the assessee submits that he has obtained Form No.3 and seeks withdrawal of appeal, therefore, we dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee, supra, as withdrawn.
However, liberty is given to the assessee to restore the appeal, in the event if the designated authority, for any reason reject the application filed by the assessee under section 4 of the said Act.
:- 3 -: ITA No: 3318/Chny/2019
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 29th June, 2021 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 4
- Prakash Dayaram Chandnani, Rajkot vs ITO Ward 2(1)(1), RajkotITA 927/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Hiteshkumar Mohanlal Desai, Daman vs The Assessment Unit, ITO, Daman Ward, DamanITA 962/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Hiteshkumar Mohanlal Desai, Daman vs The Assessment Unit, ITO, Daman Ward, DamanITA 962/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Ratilal Manubhai Dhanani, Amreli vs ITO WD 3(1)(4), AmreliITA 697/RJT/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Ratilal Manubhai Dhanani, Amreli vs ITO WD 3(1)(4), AmreliITA 697/RJT/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026