What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, citing a Madras High Court decision. The assessee was granted liberty to seek recall of the appeal if their Vivad Se Vishvas settlement was unsuccessful.

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2012-13. The assessee informed the tribunal that they had opted for the Vivad Se Vishvas Scheme, 2020.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the pendency of the appeal in light of the assessee's enrollment in the Vivad Se Vishvas Scheme.

ITO vs Ava Metalics Private Limited | ITAT Mumbai 2020

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Dhaval Shah, A.R

For Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar, D.R

Hearing: 24.12.2020Pronounced: 24.12.2020

Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member:

The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 14.03.2017 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2012-13.

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the assessee has gone into for Vivad Se Vishvas Scheme under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme 2020, therefore, the case may kindly be adjourned.

Since the assessee has gone into for Vivad Se Viswas Scheme 2020, the adjournment application by the assessee is 2 M/s. Ava Metallics Pvt. Ltd. rejected. Besides, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal of the Revenue in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court Nannusamy Mohan (HUF) vs. ACIT TCA No.372 of 2020 with the liberty to assessee to get this appeal recalled in case assessee does not succeed in VSVS 2020. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24.12.2020.

INCOME TAX OFFICER-9(1)(4), MUMBAI vs. AVA METALICS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments