M/S. TREAD STONE .LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4, KANPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 540/LKW/2017Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 January 2022AY 2008-092 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeals as they had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The appeals were accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against orders related to assessment year 2008-09. The assessee later applied to withdraw these appeals.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's request to withdraw appeals due to opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI. A. D. JAIN & SHRI T. S. KAPOOR

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A
For Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

PER BENCH: These are assessee’s appeals against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-I, Kanpur, dated 12.7.2012 passed under section 143(3) of the Act and order of the ld. CIT(A)-II, Kanpur dated 10.3.2016 passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, for assessment year 2008-09.

2.

The assessee has submitted application dated 06.10.2021, received by the Registry of this Office on 11.10.2021, vide which it has been submitted that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur-1 has issued certificate in Form No.3 on 15.4.2021, for assessment years 2008-09, under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, therefore, the assessee wants to withdraw the appeals. The Ld. DR has no objection for withdrawal of the appeals. Accordingly, we permit the assessee to withdraw the appeals.

3.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 31/01/2022.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →