EQUINOX INVESTMENT CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 9(1)-3, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3734/MUM/2012Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 February 2017AY 2004-054 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order for AY 2004-05. During the hearing, the assessee submitted a letter requesting to withdraw the appeal under the Direct Tax Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2016.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal under a specific scheme should be granted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “H”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI D.T. GARASIA & SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA

For Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen (DR)
Hearing: 01/02/2017

This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 19, Mumbai (hereinafter called as Ld. CIT (A) in short) dated 19.04.2012 passed against the penalty order of the Assessing Officer u/s 271 (1) (c) dated 25.03.2011 for AY 2004-05.

2.

During the course of hearing it was found by us that assessee has filed letter dated 27.01.2017 for withdrawing the appeal which reads as under:

“To, The Honourable Members, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” Bench, Mumbai- 400020 Ref. Appeal no. 3734/Mum-12/2012 for A.Y. 2004-2005. Subject: Withdrawing the Appeal in view of “Direct Tax Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2016.

HONORABLE MEMBERS, We request your honor we are herewith withdrawing the above referred appeal no. 3734/Mum-12/2012 for A.Y. 2004-2005 under the Direct Tax Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2016.

We are enclosing the E-payment Challan of Axix Bank for Rs. 1,28,980/- dated 25.01.2017 towards 25% of minimum penalty leviable on Rs. 5,03,920/- We have deputed and authorized Mr. Kishore N. Karnad our staff to appear before the Bench or Officers. His signature is appended below as his proof of identity.

(Kishore N. Karnad) We request your honor take the above on record and acknowledge the receipt. Thanking You, Yours faithfully, Director”

3.

Ld. DR did not raise read any objection for withdrawing the appeal by the assessee.

4.

Under these circumstances, we allow the assesse to withdraw this appeal. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Order was pronounced in the open court at the conclusion of the hearing.

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 →