ITO WARD 3, KARNAL vs. MANOJ KUMAR CHABRA, KARNAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2830/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2023AY 2015-162 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's submission regarding the Vivad se Vishwashh Scheme, which was not disputed by the Revenue. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed an order of the CIT(A) concerning the assessment year 2015-16. The assessee did not appear for the hearing but submitted that they had opted for the Vivad se Vishwashh Scheme.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for the Vivad se Vishwashh Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI & SH.ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Respondent: Ms. Kriti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR
Hearing: 09.05.2023Pronounced: 09.05.2023

ORDER

Per Anubhav Sharma, JM :

1.

The appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 31.01.2019 of CIT(A)-Karnal (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in appeal No. IT/222/E/KNL/2017-18 arising out of an appeal before it against the assessment order dated 28.12.2017 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the ITO, Ward-3, Karnal (hereinafter referred as the Ld. AO).

2.

Heard and perused the record. 3. At the time of hearing, non-appeared for the assessee in spite of notices being issued on several occasions. The record shows that by post assessee has 2830.Del.2019 Manoj Kumar Chhabra

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →