Loading ITAT cases…
223 orders · Page 5 of 5
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal as they had opted for the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme and were awaiting the necessary form. The assessee was given liberty to approach the Tribunal if any injustice arose from the scheme's settlement.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to settle their disputes under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Following the precedent of the Madras High Court, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal as requested. It was clarified that the assessee could approach the Tribunal again if any injustice occurred regarding the Vivad-se-Vishwas settlement.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Since the assessee opted for the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme, the appeal was permitted to be withdrawn.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeals as they had opted for the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme. The assessee was allowed to approach the Tribunal again if any injustice occurred during the settlement process.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme to settle their disputes. Following the precedent set by the Madras High Court, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeals as they had opted for the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme. The assessee was allowed to approach the Tribunal again if any injustice occurred during the settlement process.
The Tribunal, following a jurisdictional High Court decision, dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to restore the appeals if the 'Vivad se Vishwas' application was rejected.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The assessee can approach the Tribunal again if any injustice arises from the Vivad-se-Vishwas settlement.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal as requested. It was clarified that the assessee could approach the Tribunal again if any injustice arose from the Vivad-se-Vishwas settlement.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme to settle their disputes. Following a similar decision by the Madras High Court, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn.
The tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeals, noting that it was open for the assessee to approach the tribunal again if any injustice arose from the Vivad-se-Vishwas settlement.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing assessees to restore them if their 'Vivad se Vishwas' applications are rejected. The Tribunal also clarified the consequences of opting out or misrepresentation under the scheme.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal as requested, noting that it was open for the assessee to approach the Tribunal again if any injustice occurred regarding the scheme's settlement.
The ITAT held that the CIT(A) did not provide the AO with a proper opportunity to examine the evidence submitted by the assessee, both on the jurisdictional issue and the merits. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the AO for fresh examination.
The Tribunal held that the discrepancy in loan liability was due to inadvertent accounting errors where old and new loans were accounted for twice. The assessee had provided reconciliation and evidence to rectify these duplicate entries.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by both the assessee and the revenue 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 noted that the assessees intended to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme to settle their disputes. Following a similar order by the Madras High Court, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn.
The Tribunal noted that the assessees intended to utilize the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme to settle their disputes. Following a similar decision by the Madras High Court, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, allowing assessees to restore them if their 'Vivad se Vishwas' applications are rejected. The Tribunal also clarified the consequences of opting out or misrepresentation under the scheme.
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. It also clarified the revival of proceedings if the scheme is opted out of or misrepresented.
The Tribunal allowed the assessees to withdraw their appeals 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 assessees to restore them if their 'Vivad se Vishwas' applications are rejected. The Tribunal also clarified the consequences of opting out or misrepresentation under the scheme.