ACIT CIRCLE 16 (1), MUMBAI vs. M/S TV 18 HOUSE SHOPPING NERWORK LTD., MUMBAI

By way of this appeal, the revenue contest the action of Ld. first appellate authority in deleting certain disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) for Rs.395.19 Lacs.

The Ld. Authorized Representative for assessee (AR), at the outset, submitted that the assessee has already opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VVS Scheme) and filed requisite declaration in Form- 1 on 05/11/2020. The copy of the same has been placed on record. In the said background, Ld. AR submitted that the appeal may be 2 Assessment Year: 2015-16 dismissed in terms of decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in M/s Nannusamy Mohan (HUF) V/s ACIT (TCA NO. 372 of 2020) dated 16/10/2020. The Ld. DR did not object to the same but pleaded for liberty in case the declaration is not accepted for whatsoever reasons.

Upon due consideration, going by the said decision, since the assessee has already opted for VVS Scheme and filed requisite declaration therein, the appeal would stand dismissed. However, the revenue is given liberty to seek restoration of this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration filed by the assessee u/s 4 of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 is not in favor of the assessee. If such prayer is made, the registry shall entertain the prayer forthwith without insisting upon any application to be filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appeal and on such request being made by the revenue by filing a miscellaneous application for restoration, the registry shall place such petition before the bench for orders.

In view of the foregoing, the appeal stands dismissed. Order pronounced on 24th November, 2020. (Saktijit Dey) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) "ाियक सद" / Judicial Member लेखा सद" / Accountant Member