ITAT Panaji Judgments — March 2021

SHRI SANJAY GOPAL BICHU,BELGAUM vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(2), BELGAUM

ITA 58/PAN/2018[2010-11]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2021AY 2010-11Withdrawn

The Tribunal permitted the withdrawal of the appeal as the assessee had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

MAHENDRAKUMAR RIKABCHAND SHAH,GOKAK vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

ITA 439/PAN/2018[2010-11]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2021AY 2010-11Withdrawn

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw all the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn by the Tribunal.

MR. MANOJ DHIRAJLAL RAJANI,PANAJI vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

ITA 451/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2021AY 2013-14Withdrawn

The tribunal permitted the withdrawal of the appeals as the assessees had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme, 2020. Consequently, both appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

SHRI SUBHASH SHANKAR MAGDUM,NIPANI vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, NIPANI

ITA 411/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2021AY 2012-13Dismissed

The Tribunal permitted the withdrawal of the appeal as the assessee had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme and the Revenue had no objection.

MAHENDRAKUMAR RIKABCHAND SHAH,GOKAK vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

ITA 441/PAN/2018[2012 -13]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2021Withdrawn

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw all the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn by the Tribunal.

MAHENDRAKUMAR RIKABCHAND SHAH,GOKAK vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

ITA 442/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2021AY 2013-14Withdrawn

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw all the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn by the Tribunal.

RIKHAVDAS TEJMAL SHAH (HUF),NIPANI vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, NIPANI

ITA 455/PAN/2018[2015-16]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2021AY 2015-16Dismissed

The assessee requested to withdraw the appeal as they had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme and had filed the necessary declaration. The Tribunal permitted the withdrawal.

MAHENDRAKUMAR RIKABCHAND SHAH,GOKAK vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

ITA 440/PAN/2018[2011-12]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2021AY 2011-12Withdrawn

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw all the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn by the Tribunal.

M/S MINAS E MINERALS DE GOA PRIVATE LIMITED,MORMUGAO vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2, MARGAO

ITA 192/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2021AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The Tribunal permitted the withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by the assessee.

MRS NEETA MANOJ RAJANI,PANAJI vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

ITA 452/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2021AY 2013-14Withdrawn

The tribunal permitted the withdrawal of the appeals as the assessees had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme, 2020. Consequently, both appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

M/S P. G. HOLIDAY INN PRIVATE LIMITED,COLVA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER - 8(2)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 280/PAN/2019[2007-08]Status: Disposed8 Mar 2021AY 2007-08Remanded

The Tribunal noted that crucial evidence regarding the unsecured loans was not produced before the AO or CIT(A) due to genuine reasons and format issues. The Tribunal found the evidence submitted before it to be necessary for fair adjudication.