PAVAN VAISH,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-70, NEW DELHI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted the assessee's settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. Consequently, the appeal was consigned to records and treated as dismissed, subject to a caveat.
What were the facts?
The assessee had appealed an order from the CIT(A) for AY 2013-14. The assessee subsequently opted to settle tax arrears under The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, and filed the necessary declaration.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee opting for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. The primary issue is the procedural consequence of the settlement on the pending appeal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI
ORDER
PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JM:
This appeal is preferred by the assessee against order dated 26.05.2017 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, New Delhi {CIT(A)} for Assessment Year 2013-14.
2.0 The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) submits that the assessee has opted to settle the dispute relating to the tax arrears for the assessment year under consideration under The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. It has been stated that the necessary declaration in accordance with Section 4 of The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 has been filed by the assessee.
3.0 Considering the aforesaid situation, the captioned appeal is consigned to the records and treated as dismissed.
4.0 However, the aforesaid is subject to a caveat that in case the dispute relating to tax arrears for the captioned assessment year is not ultimately resolved in terms of the aforestated Act, the appellant (i.e., the assessee) shall be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for reinstitution of the appeal and the Tribunal shall consider such application appropriately as per law. The respondent (i.e., the Revenue) has no objection with regard to the aforesaid caveat.
5.0 In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is consigned to the records and, for statistical purposes, is treated as dismissed.
Above decision was announced on conclusion of Virtual Hearing on 23 December, 2020.
More judgments on Section 4
- Prakash Dayaram Chandnani, Rajkot vs ITO Ward 2(1)(1), RajkotITA 927/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Hiteshkumar Mohanlal Desai, Daman vs The Assessment Unit, ITO, Daman Ward, DamanITA 962/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Hiteshkumar Mohanlal Desai, Daman vs The Assessment Unit, ITO, Daman Ward, DamanITA 962/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Ratilal Manubhai Dhanani, Amreli vs ITO WD 3(1)(4), AmreliITA 697/RJT/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Ratilal Manubhai Dhanani, Amreli vs ITO WD 3(1)(4), AmreliITA 697/RJT/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026