ITAT Mumbai Judgments — November 2020

The Tribunal noted that once a matter is resolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. The Tribunal, therefore, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The ITAT allowed the assessee's petition to withdraw the appeal. The tribunal noted that the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020.

The tribunal noted that the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020. The departmental representative did not oppose the withdrawal.

The Tribunal acknowledged the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. As the matter was resolved, the appeal was no longer required to be pursued.

The Tribunal noted that once a matter is settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the assessee's prayer.

The tribunal noted that the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the withdrawal.

The assessee sought to withdraw the appeal as the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020. The Tribunal, finding no opposition from the revenue, allowed the withdrawal.

The Tribunal noted that once a matter is settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. The Tribunal considered the position and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The tribunal noted that the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020. The departmental representative did not oppose the withdrawal.

The tribunal noted that the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the withdrawal.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's prayer for withdrawal was not opposed by the Revenue. The Tribunal acknowledged that once a matter is settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal must be withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 and the Departmental Representative did not oppose the withdrawal. Accordingly, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the withdrawal.

The Tribunal held that while the purchases might be from unidentified sources, the assessee had made corresponding sales. It was reasonable to assume that the suppressed element was the VAT not paid. Therefore, the addition was restricted to the VAT rate of 4% of the alleged non-genuine purchases.

The Tribunal held that the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was justified because the assessee failed to provide any explanation or evidence regarding the addition made under Section 68, and also failed to demonstrate that there was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars.

The Tribunal noted that once a matter is settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that once a matter is settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. The Tribunal therefore dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The Tribunal considered the assessee's request for withdrawal due to settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the prayer.

The Tribunal held that no disallowance under Section 14A was warranted on tax-free income earned from stock-in-trade. For bad debts, the Tribunal found that the issue concerning the amended provisions of Section 36(1)(vii) for AY 2014-15 needed to be revisited by the Assessing Officer.

The Tribunal noted that once a matter is resolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 provides for the withdrawal of related appeals once a matter is settled. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the assessee's prayer.

The Tribunal noted that once a matter is resolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted the assessee's letter seeking permission to withdraw the appeal and, with no opposition from the Revenue, granted the permission. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal held that since the Section 263 order was annulled, all consequential orders, including the fresh demand raised under Section 201(1)/201(1A), became invalid. Furthermore, on merits, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s finding that Section 194H was not applicable to stockiest margins.

The Tribunal noted that once a matter is settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. The Tribunal considered the withdrawal request and the lack of opposition from the Revenue.

The Tribunal noted that once a matter is settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's prayer for withdrawal.

The Tribunal acknowledged the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and the requirement to withdraw the appeal. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the withdrawal.

The Tribunal noted that the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the withdrawal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's request for withdrawal. As the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the appeal was permitted to be withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that once a matter is settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The assessee sought withdrawal of the appeal as the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the prayer.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn because the assessee had filed a declaration under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. The dismissal was subject to the assessee's right to seek restoration if the matter was not settled under the scheme.

The Tribunal held that no disallowance under Section 14A was warranted on tax-free income earned from stock-in-trade. For bad debts, the Tribunal found that the issue concerning the amended provisions of Section 36(1)(vii) for AY 2014-15 needed to be revisited by the Assessing Officer.

The Tribunal noted that the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the withdrawal. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that once a matter is settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. The Tribunal granted the assessee's prayer for withdrawal.

The Tribunal held that no disallowance under Section 14A was warranted on tax-free income earned from stock-in-trade. For bad debts, the Tribunal found that the issue concerning the amended provisions of Section 36(1)(vii) for AY 2014-15 needed to be revisited by the Assessing Officer.

The Tribunal held that no disallowance under Section 14A was warranted on tax-free income earned from stock-in-trade. For bad debts, the Tribunal found that the issue concerning the amended provisions of Section 36(1)(vii) for AY 2014-15 needed to be revisited by the Assessing Officer.

The Tribunal acknowledged the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The assessee requested to withdraw the appeal as the matter was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020. The Departmental Representative did not oppose this prayer.

The Tribunal noted that the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 resolves tax disputes. Therefore, an appeal related to a settled matter should be withdrawn.

The tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. This dismissal is subject to the condition that the assessee can seek restoration of the appeal if the matter is not resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme.

The Tribunal acknowledged the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the withdrawal request.

The Tribunal directed the AO to re-compute the disallowance under Section 14A by considering only those investments that actually yielded exempt income. The Tribunal also allowed the deduction of education cess as a business expenditure, following jurisdictional High Court decisions.

The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue for fresh adjudication. The tribunal directed the assessee to cooperate with the proceedings before the first appellate authority to ensure a proper opportunity of hearing.

The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue for fresh adjudication. The tribunal directed the assessee to cooperate with the proceedings before the first appellate authority to ensure a proper opportunity of hearing.

The Tribunal noted that once a matter is settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. The Tribunal, in view of the withdrawal request and the scheme, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The Tribunal acknowledged the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. As the matter was settled, the appeal was permitted to be withdrawn.

The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal due to settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the prayer.

The Tribunal acknowledged that once a matter is settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the related appeal must be withdrawn. The Departmental Representative did not oppose the assessee's prayer.