DCIT, LTU, CIRCLE- 1 & 2, NEW DELHI vs. INDIAN YAMAHA MOTOR PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6039/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 October 2025AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal accepted the submission that the appeal had become infructuous due to the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to revive the appeal if the scheme application failed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2013-14. During the hearing, the assessee's AR submitted that the issue was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024, rendering the appeal infructuous.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal becomes infructuous if the assessee settles the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘I’: NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT DR
Hearing: 09.10.2025

(Assessment Year: 2013-14) DCIT, LTU, Circle 1 & 2, vs. India Yamaha Motor Pvt. Ltd., 1st Floor, Great Eastern Centre, New Delhi. 70, Nehru Place, IFCI Tower, New Delhi – 110 019. (PAN : AABCI7552F) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 09.10.2025 Date of Order : 09.10.2025 O R D E R

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

The Revenue has filed appeal against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals),-44, New Delhi [for short ‘ld. CIT (A)] dated 29.06.2018 for Assessment Year 2013-14.

2.

At the time of hearing, ld. AR for the assessee submitted that since the assessee has settled the issue under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 (in short ‘VSVS’), hence, the appeal filed by the Revenue has become infructuous and deserves to be dismissed as infructuous. In this regard, the ld. AR for the assessee submitted that Form 4 has been issued by the designated authority and a copy of the same is brought on record. Ld. DR did not controvert the aforesaid proposition.

3.

In view of the above, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous.

4.

Liberty is granted to the Revenue to revive appeal in the event application filed by the assessee under VSVS fails to mature. It is further made clear that if the Revenue seeks to restore the appeals in the event assessee’s declaration made under VSVS is not accepted, the Registry shall not insist for filing of application for condonation of delay, if the Miscellaneous Application for recalling the order is filed beyond time on account of delay in communication of outcome under VSVS. [Revenue. M/s. Nannusamy Mohan (HUF) vs. ACIT in T.C.A. No.372 of 2020 decided on 16.10.2020 by Hon’ble Madras High Court.] 5. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed at the behest of the assessee to settle the issue under VSVS. Order pronounced in the open court on this 9TH day of October, 2025 after the conclusion of the hearing. Sd/- sd/- (SUDHIR PAREEK) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 09.10.2025 TS

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →