ABHAY KUMAR JAIN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD 9(1), CHENNAI

This appeal filed by the assessee is against order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Chennai in dated 30.11.2018 for assessment year 2014-15.

This case was heard through video conferencing. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the assessee inviting our attention to the copy of the letter dated 15.02.2021 submitted that the assessee wanted to utilize the Direct Taxes ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020’ to settle pending dispute

The Bench has considered rival contentions of both sides and after hearing both parties, we find that the assessee has filed declaration in Form No.1 along with undertaking waiving rights for any remedy in Form No. 2 to the designated Authority and has also received Form 3. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee, supra, as withdrawn.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 of the Designated Authority, for any reason reject the application filed by the assessee under section 4 of the said Act. We, further make it clear that if the assessee has for any reason opted out from the scheme or the applicant under the scheme misrepresent any fact which resulted in rejection of application filed under the scheme, then the provisions of section 4(6) of the Act, shall be applicable to all such appeals and in such cases, all the proceedings and the claims which were withdrawn under section 4 and all the consequences under the Income-tax Act against the declarant shall be deemed to have been revived. We, further make it clear that the assessee should promptly inform the Assessing Officer about their decision to opt out of the scheme or rejection of application by the designated authority to the Assessing Officer, so as to enable to file miscellaneous application to restore the appeal.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.