THE KRISHNA FARMERS SERVICE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,JAGGAIAHPET vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1(3), VIJAYAWADA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw its appeal, considering their decision to opt for the DTVSV scheme and the completion of settlement procedures. Consequently, the assessee's appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty to approach the Tribunal if the case is not finally settled under the DTVSV for any reason.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed under sections 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act for AY 2018-19. During the hearing, the assessee requested to withdraw the appeal, stating they had opted for the "Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024" (DTVSV), received Form No.2, paid the determined tax demand of Rs. 9,40,241/-, and submitted Form No.4 for full and final settlement.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee should be permitted to withdraw its appeal before the Tribunal after opting for the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and settling the tax demand.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVISION” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HONBLE & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HONBLE
आदेश /O R D E R
PER SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JM:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter in short “Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order dated 19/12/2024 arising out of the order passed U/s. 147 r.w.s 144B of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) for the A.Y. 2018-19.
Page No. 1
2 ITA 131/Viz/2025 The Krishna Farmers Service Coop Society Lte vs. ITO 2. At the time of hearing of the appeal, none appeared before us on behalf of the assessee. However, from the record we find that the assessee has filed a letter, dated 18/04/2025, seeking permission of the Bench to withdraw the appeal and also mentioned that as the assessee had opted for the “Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024" (“DTVSV”, for short) and received Form No.2 from the competent Authorities determining the tax payable as Rs. 9,40,241/-. Thereafter, the assessee, vide Challan No. 836, KDCC Bank, Jaggaiahpet has paid the tax demand of Rs. 9,40,241/-. The assessee has also submitted Form.4, issued by the Ld. Pr. CIT, Vijayawada ie., Order for full and final settlement of tax U/s. 92(2) r.w.s 93 of the Act, dated 23/05/2025. Therefore, it is the prayer of the assessee that it may be permitted to withdraw the appeal.
The Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) did not object to the submissions of the assessee.
On a perusal of the assessee’s submissions filed before us with respect to their decision to opt for the “Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024", considering the same, we hereby allow the assessee to withdraw its appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the assessee’s appeal as withdrawn with a liberty to the assessee to approach the Tribunal if for any reason it’s case is not finally settled under the DTVSV.
Page No. 2
3 ITA 131/Viz/2025 The Krishna Farmers Service Coop Society Lte vs. ITO 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 09th June, 2025. 6.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026