RAJKUMAR BHOJRAJ LULLA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - CC- 3 (4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6419/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 December 2020AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' and decided that no purpose would be served by keeping the appeal pending. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A). During the hearing, the assessee expressed an intention to settle the tax litigation by opting for the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020'.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be kept pending when the assessee intends to settle the litigation under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 250,Section 254(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Respondent: Shri Ravindra Mishra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 09/12/2020

सुनवाई क� तार�ख / Date of Hearing 09/12/2020 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement 15 /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) -51, Mumbai, passed u/s. 143(3 )r.w.s 147 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 Rajkumar Bhojraj Lulla, 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 has filed an application as mentioned by the Ld.AR. We are of the view that, 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 Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn and the assessee is given liberty to move an application u/s 254(2) of the Act to recall the present order in accordance with the provisions of law.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 15.12.2020

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →