CLARIANT CHEMICALS (INDIA) LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1336/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 December 2020AY 1998-993 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. However, since the assessee opted for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme, no adjudication on merits was required.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals before the ITAT, which were time-barred by 13 working days. The assessee sought condonation of delay, stating they were opting for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeals should be condoned. The primary issue became moot due to the assessee's decision to settle under Vivad Se Vishwas.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not Applicable

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

ORDER Per Pramod Kumar, VP:

1.

With the consent of the parties all these appeals are being taken up for the hearing today itself, i.e., when the petition seeking early hearing of these appeals came up for our consideration. to 1339/Mum/2020 Assessment Years: 1998-99, 2000-01, 2001-02 & 2005-06

Page 2 of 3 2. These appeals are time barred by 13 working days and the assessee has moved the petition seeking condonation of delay.

3.

When the appeals were taken up for the hearing learned counsel for the assessee Shri Rajan Vora, submitted that the delay in filing of the appeals may kindly be condoned as the assessee is opting for settlement of this pending dispute under Vivad Se Vishwas scheme 2020. He further, submits that in any case the delay in filling of appeal is reasonably explained and he has filed detailed explanation with respect to delay which deserves to be accepted on merits as well. Shri Rajan Vora, further submitted that as the assessee is opting for the settlement of pending dispute as such, and the assessee does not therefore, wish to persue the appeals. The appeals may kindly be dismissed.

4.

Shri. Brajendra Kumar, Departmental Representative does not object to the prayer made by the assessee. He submits that given the fact that the assessee is opting for settlement of dispute under Vivad Se Vishwas scheme 2020, he has no objection to the condonation of the delay.

5 In view of the above discussions and bearing in mind the entirety of the matter, we deem it fit and proper to condone the delay in filing of appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merits. However, as the assessee is opting for resolution of the dispute under Vivad Se Vishwas scheme 2020, no such adjudication on merit is warranted anyway. The permission to withdraw the appeal is, accordingly, allowed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →