SUKHMINDER SINGH SO JOGINDER SINGH VILLAGE AND POST OFFICE UDHAMGARH, JAGADHRI YAMUNANAGAR ,HARYANA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER NFAC DELHI JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5 YAMUNANAGAR, HARYANA

PDF

ITA 647/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 February 2025AY 2018-2019Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 647/CHD/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sukhminder Singh, S/o Joginder Singh, Village and PO Udhamgarh, Jagadhri Yamunanagar The ITO, बनाम Ward 5, Vs. Yamunanagar स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BPSPS7167A अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent (Hybrid Mode) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : None (Withdrawal Application) राजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR सुनवाई क1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) with a delay of 9 days. The assessee subsequently filed an application for withdrawal of the appeal, stating that they have opted for the Direct Tax 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2024'.

Held

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering the assessee's prayer for withdrawal due to opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

Key Issues

Whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal and whether to allow the withdrawal of appeal due to opting for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

Sections Cited

254(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

Hearing: 06.02.2025Pronounced: 24.02.2025

Order Per Krinwant Sahay, AM : Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 15.03.2024 of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], for the Assessment Year 2018-19.

It is seen from the record that the Registry has pointed out a delay of 08 days (09 days as per Assessee) in filing of 647-Chd-2024 Sukhminder Singh, Jagdhari 2 the appeal. The Assessee has submitted that an Application for condonation of delay, which is reproduced as under:

647-Chd-2024 Sukhminder Singh, Jagdhari 3 3. We have considered the issue brought on record and gone through the contents of the affidavit for condonation of delay and we feel it appropriate to condone the delay because of the nature of issue discussed in the affidavit.

The ld. DR had no objection for condonation of delay.

During the proceedings, none appeared on behalf of the Assessee. However, an application dated 23.01.2025 has been filed on by the Assessee for withdrawal of this appeal on the ground that the Assessee has opted for Direct Tax 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2024’ and sought permission of the Bench to withdraw the aforementioned appeal. Necessary certificate in Form No.2 under Rule 5 has been issued to him which is placed on record.

Considering the prayer of the assessee, this appeal is dismissed as ‘withdrawn’ because in view of this settlement of dispute under 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme', it becomes infructuous. However, it is made clear that in case, on account of some technicalities, assessee fails to avail the full benefit of this Scheme, then both sides will be at liberty to get 647-Chd-2024 Sukhminder Singh, Jagdhari the appeal revived after filing of application under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act. Such application be filed within due date of limitation provided under this Scheme.