MAHENDRA REALTORS & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(TDS)-CPC, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. Both parties agreed that the appeals could be dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to restore them if the scheme settlement faced issues.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals against the CIT(A)'s order for assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16. The assessee had filed a declaration under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the pendency of the appeal due to the assessee's participation in 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, MUMBAI “D” BENCH, MUMBAI
O R D E R Per Bench:
1. 1. By way of these appeals, the assessee appellant has called into question correctness of the order dated 24.01.2019 passed by the learned CIT(A)-59, Mumbai in the matter of assessment u/s.200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16.
2. When these appeals were called out for hearing, it is noticed that the assessee has filed the necessary declaration under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) and is awaiting for final resolution of the matter under the said scheme.
3. The ld. DR also did accept our suggestion that these appeals can be dismissed, with the liberty to the assessee to approach the Tribunal, if for some unforeseen reason, there are issues with respect to settlement of the matter under Vivad se Vishwas scheme, 2020. to 1606/Mum/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Page 2 of 2 4. In view of the above, we dismiss these appeals as withdrawn, subject to be rider that in the unlikely event of matter not being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme, the assessee shall have liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration of his appeal. 5. In the result, these appeals are dismissed as withdrawn – subject to the observation above. Pronounced in the open court today on the 24th December, 2020.
More judgments on Section 200A
- Mulchand Ramkishan Laddha, Pune vs Income Tax Officer (TDS-2), PuneITA 874/PUN/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2669/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2668/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2667/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2666/PUN/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026