Loading ITAT cases…
324 orders · Page 4 of 7
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to settle their disputes under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and, following a similar High Court order, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to settle disputes under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and, following a jurisdictional High Court order, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal noted that the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' allows for the settlement of direct tax disputes. Following a similar decision by the Madras High Court, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, granting liberty to restore them if the scheme application is rejected.
The Tribunal noted that the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' allows for the settlement of direct tax disputes. Following a similar High Court order, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, granting liberty to restore them if the scheme application is rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing liberty to the assessees to restore them if their applications under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme are rejected. The decision was based on a similar High Court ruling.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if their applications under the scheme were rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing liberty to the assessees to restore them if their applications under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme are rejected. The Tribunal also clarified the consequences of opting out or misrepresentation under the scheme.
The Tribunal, following the decision of the Madras High Court, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, granting liberty to the assessees to restore them if their applications under the scheme are rejected.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to utilize the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' to settle disputes. Following a precedent from the Madras High Court, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, granting liberty to restore them if the scheme application is rejected.
The Tribunal, following the decision of the Madras High Court, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to restore them if their Vivad se Vishwas applications are rejected. The Tribunal also clarified the implications of opting out of or misrepresenting facts under the scheme.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if their applications under the scheme were rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if their applications under the scheme were rejected.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the cross objection. Considering the assessee's intent to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal, following a decision of the Madras High Court, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing liberty to restore them if the 'Vivad se Vishwas' application is rejected. It also clarified the consequences of opting out or misrepresentation under the scheme.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing liberty to the assessees to restore them if their application under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme is rejected. The Tribunal also clarified the consequences of opting out or misrepresentation under the scheme.
The Tribunal noted that the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' allows for the settlement of direct tax disputes. Following a similar decision by the Madras High Court, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, granting liberty to the assessees to restore them if their applications under the scheme are rejected.
The Tribunal noted the assessees' intention to settle disputes under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and referred to a Madras High Court judgment dismissing an appeal as withdrawn under similar circumstances. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if their applications under the scheme were rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing liberty to the assessees to restore them if their applications under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme are rejected. The Tribunal also clarified the consequences of opting out of the scheme or misrepresentation.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to restore them if their application under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme is rejected. The Tribunal also clarified the consequences of opting out or misrepresentation under the scheme.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application is rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, following a High Court decision, allowing liberty to restore the appeals if the Vivad se Vishwas application is rejected. The Tribunal also clarified the consequences if the Revenue had filed appeals or if assessees misrepresented facts.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, following the precedent set by the Madras High Court regarding the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to the assessees to restore their appeals if their applications under the scheme are rejected.
The Tribunal noted that the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' allows for the settlement of direct tax disputes. Following a similar High Court order, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, granting liberty to restore them if the scheme application is rejected.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to utilize the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' to settle their tax disputes. Following a similar decision by the Madras High Court, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to settle their disputes under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and, following a similar High Court order, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal noted that the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' allows for the settlement of direct tax disputes. Following the precedent of the Madras High Court, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to restore them if the scheme application is rejected.
The Tribunal noted the assessees' intention to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and, following a High Court precedent, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, following a Madras High Court decision. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the 'Vivad se Vishwas' application is rejected by the designated authority.
The Tribunal found that the AO had not considered the relevant documents submitted by the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and remitted the matters back to the AO for fresh adjudication after considering all evidence.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal noted that the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' allows for the settlement of tax disputes. Following the precedent set by the Madras High Court, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, granting liberty to restore them if the scheme application is rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing liberty to the assessees to restore them if their applications under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme are rejected. The decision was based on a similar High Court ruling.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, following the precedent set by the Madras High Court. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the application under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme is rejected by the designated authority.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to avail the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to utilize the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020'. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if their applications under the scheme were rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, following the precedent set by the Madras High Court regarding the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application is rejected.
The Tribunal, following a decision of the Madras High Court, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing liberty to restore them if the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme' application is rejected. The Tribunal clarified the consequences of opting out or misrepresentation under the scheme.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to settle their disputes under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Following a similar High Court order, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to settle their disputes under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and, following a High Court precedent, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to settle their disputes under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and, following a High Court precedent, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to utilize the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme'. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to settle their disputes under the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme'. Following a similar decision by the Madras High Court, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing the assessees to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application is rejected.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals and, noting the assessees' intention to utilize the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020', dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if their applications under the scheme were rejected.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to settle their disputes under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and, following a similar High Court order, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the scheme application was rejected.
The Tribunal, following the jurisdictional High Court's decision, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, granting liberty to restore them if the 'Vivad se Vishwas' application is rejected. The Tribunal also clarified the consequences of opting out or misrepresentation under the scheme.