M/S. MANTRI DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED (AMALGAMATED COMPANY IN RESPECT OF PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ERSTWHILE M/S. MANTRI MANSION PRIVATE LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE- 2(1), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2088/BANG/2019Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 September 2020AY 2017-184 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The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, noting that no purpose would be served in keeping it pending since the assessee had already initiated proceedings under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act. The assessee was granted liberty to seek recall of the order if necessary.

What were the facts?

The assessee sought an adjournment of their appeal before the ITAT, stating they had filed applications under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, and were awaiting Form 3. The Revenue suggested dismissing the appeal as withdrawn, as the assessee would eventually withdraw it. The assessee requested liberty to seek recall of the order if the appeal was dismissed.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn when the assessee is pursuing settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and awaiting further forms.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 221

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K. & SHRI B.R. BASKARAN

For Appellant: Shri Bhairav Kuttaiah, A.R
For Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan, D.R
Hearing: 07.09.2020Pronounced: 09.09.2020

PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 30-07-2019 passed by Ld CIT(A)-9, Bangalore and it relates to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of Ld CIT(A) in confirming the penalty levied by the AO u/s 221 of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short].

M/s. Mantri Developers Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

Page 2 of 4 2. The authorised representative of the assessee has moved a letter dated 02nd day of September, 2020 seeking adjournment and it reads as under: - “I, V. SRINIVASAN, Advocate and Authorised representative of the above appellant begs to submit the following for the kind consideration and gracious favourable orders of the Hon’ble Bench as under:

1. 1. That the above referred appeal is posted for hearing before the Hon’ble Bench on 07.09.2020.

2. That the above appellant instructs me to submit that the above appellant has filed Form 1 and Form 2 under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act with respect to the above appeal and issue of Form 3 is awaited. Upon receipt of Form 3, the above appellant will be withdrawing the above appeal filed before the Hon’ble ITAT, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore to enable them to settle the appeal under the scheme.

3. That under these circumstances, it is requested that the above case may kindly be adjourned to any other date convenient to the Hon’ble Bench after the receipt of the certificate from the Department.

4. That the inconvenience caused in this regard may kindly be excused.”

The counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee has prayed for adjournment.

3.

The Ld D.R, however, submitted that the assessee has to withdraw the pending appeals after filing Form VSV1 as per Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. Thereafter, the assessee is required to furnish a copy of the same along with the proof of payment of tax as determined by the tax official to the department. He submitted that the Form no.3 shall be issued to the assessee in due course and accordingly he submitted that the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed as withdrawn, as the assessee, in any way, is required to withdraw the appeal.

M/s. Mantri Developers Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 3 of 4 4. The Ld A.R, in the rejoinder, submitted that the assessee should be given liberty to seek recall of the order, if the appeal is dismissed by the bench.

5.

We heard the parties and perused the record. Since the assessee has already filed applications in Form 1 and Form 2 under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, the appellant would be moving application for withdrawing the present appeal filed before the Tribunal in due course. Since the assessee has already filed the necessary applications before the tax authorities under the above said Act, we are of the view that no purpose will be served in keeping these appeal pending. Accordingly we dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn.

6.

The assessee has stated that he has not received Form no.3, in which the tax amount to be paid by the assessee shall be intimated by the department. Hence the assessee has sought adjournment till the time Form no.3 is received from the department, meaning thereby, the assessee wants to make sure that the tax liability mentioned by him in Form no.1 should get confirmed by the revenue. Under these set of facts, since we have dismissed the appeal, the assessee is given liberty to move appropriate application for recall of the present order in accordance with the law, if the assessee intends to do so.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open court on 9th Sept, 2020

Sd/- Sd/- (George George K.) (B.R. Baskaran) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore, Dated 9th Sept, 2020. VG/SPS

M/s. Mantri Developers Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

More judgments on Section 221

All 136 judgments and leading authorities on Section 221 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →