SMT.MANGAL M. GAITONDE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), KALYAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1247/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 December 2020AY 2012-132 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 noted that the assessee opted for the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' and would be applying for it. Therefore, keeping the appeal pending would serve no purpose.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order related to penalty and assessment. During the hearing, the assessee expressed an intention to settle the tax litigation through the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020'. The revenue had no objections.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be kept pending when the assessee intends to settle the dispute under a specific scheme. The applicability and implications of the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' on ongoing appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 250,Section 254(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALESmt. Mangal M. Gaitonde

For Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, DR
Hearing: 01/12/2020Pronounced: 02/12/2020

सुनवाई क� तार�ख / Date of Hearing 01/12/2020 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement 02/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R

PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE - JM:

1.

The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -3, Thane, passed u/s. 271(1)(c) and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

At the time hearing, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee is intended to settle the Smt. Mangal M. Gaitonde, Mumbai. - 2 - tax litigation by opting for ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020’. Contra, the Ld. DR has no objections.

3 .We heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. Since the assessee has opted for ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020’ and the assessee would be moving an application for the scheme as envisaged by the Ld. AR. We are of the view that, the no purpose will be served in keeping the appeal pending. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn and the assessee is given liberty to move an application u/s 254(2) of the Act to recall the present order in accordance with the provisions of law.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 02.12.2020

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →