ITAT Ahmedabad Judgments — February 2021

The Tribunal allowed the assessees' request to withdraw their appeals, as their applications under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, were approved. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's decision to settle the issues under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, allowing the assessee to pursue the VSV scheme. It also granted liberty to seek restoration if the VSV benefit could not be availed for bonafide reasons.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had exercised its option to settle the issues under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Therefore, the Tribunal found no necessity to keep the appeals and cross-objections pending.

The Tribunal considered the submissions and applications of the assessees for withdrawal of appeals due to their opting for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The request for withdrawal was allowed in accordance with the scheme's provisions.

The Tribunal allowed the assessees' request to withdraw the appeals, noting that their applications under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme had been approved. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, considering the larger interest of the assessee in availing the VSV Scheme. Consequently, both appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal allowed the assessees' request to withdraw their appeals in light of the approved applications under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The withdrawal was in accordance with the provisions of the scheme.

The Tribunal considered the submissions and applications of the assessees for withdrawal of appeals due to their opting for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The request for withdrawal was allowed in accordance with the scheme's provisions.

The Tribunal held that the disallowance of director's remuneration was not justified as it was covered by previous ITAT and High Court decisions. Similarly, the addition for unutilized CENVAT credit was deleted based on earlier ITAT rulings.

The Tribunal held that the assessee was eligible for deduction on account of bad debts as the income related to these debts had been offered to tax. The Tribunal followed its own coordinate bench decision and High Court judgments.

The Tribunal allowed the assessees' applications to withdraw their appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to seek restoration if the VSV scheme benefits could not be availed for bonafide reasons.