← All Phrases

“Vivad se Vishwas”

Settlement & AmnestyDTVSV 2020DTVSV 20204,976 judgments

The decision most relied on for Vivad se Vishwas is Damodar Valley Corpn v. Addl. CIT (66 Taxmann.com 25), cited in 14 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Vivad se Vishwas

Damodar Valley Corpn v. Addl. CIT
66 Taxmann.com 25 · 2016 · ITAT
14
citing judgments

The Tribunal's decision in the assessee's own case on a specific issue is binding on the Revenue for subsequent assessment years, especially when the assessee has availed the Vivad se Vishwas scheme and appeals have been dismissed on similar grounds.

Judgments citing Vivad se Vishwas

Rajeev Brijbhushan Bhatnagar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-28(2)(1), Mumbai, Vashi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4501/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Rajeev Brijbhushan Bhatnagar, Ito-28(2)(1), C/O Ca Himanshu Gandhi Tower No. 6, Vashi Railway Station Vs. Chartered Accountants 16Th Floor, Commercial Complex, Vashi, D Wing, Trade World Tower, Navi Mumbai-400703. Kamala Mills Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Acfpb 2967 G Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Himanshu Gandhi/
Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250Section 271FSection 54

pending before the Ld. CIT(A). Meanwhile, the as pending before the Ld. CIT(A). Meanwhile, the assessee sessee opted for benefit of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 in respect of in respect of appeal against the penalty order u/s 271F ... assessee filed against assessee filed against order u/s 147 as withdrawn as withdrawn under the impression that Vivad Se under the impression that Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme was opted for appeal against u/s 147 of the Act. Vishwas Scheme was opted for appeal against u/s 147 of the Act. Vishwas

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Lvmh Watch & Jewelery India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2748/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Oct 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. M/S. Lvmh Watch & Circle-4(1), Jewellery India Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi International Trade Tower, 301-302, 3Rd Floor, Block-F, Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacl7814N M/S. Lvmh Watch & Vs. Dcit, Jewellery India Pvt. Ltd, Circle-4(1), International Trade New Delhi Tower, 301-302, 3Rd Floor, Block-F, Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacl7814N Acit, Vs. M/S. Lvmh Watch & Circle-4(1), Jewellery India Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi International Trade Tower, 301-302, 3Rd Floor, Block-F, Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacl7814N Assessee By : Shri Tapas Ram Mishra, Adv Shri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, Ar Shri Sahil Malhotra, Ar Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit Dr Shri Gaurav Bansal, Sr. Dr Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21/10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Tapas Ram Mishra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 4Section 91(1)Section 91(4)

before the passing of the orders, the assessee filed a letter dated 16.10.24 before us stating that it would be availing the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 introduced by the Statute to settle the tax disputes prevailing in these years. Accordingly, vide letter dated 16.10.24, the assessee made a prayer ... this Bench not to pronounce the orders so as to enable the assessee to avail the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. We find that this request of the assessee to be fair keeping in mind the intention of the Government of India to resolve the various direct tax disputes pending

Lvmh Watch & Jewellery Indi (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4022/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Oct 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. M/S. Lvmh Watch & Circle-4(1), Jewellery India Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi International Trade Tower, 301-302, 3Rd Floor, Block-F, Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacl7814N M/S. Lvmh Watch & Vs. Dcit, Jewellery India Pvt. Ltd, Circle-4(1), International Trade New Delhi Tower, 301-302, 3Rd Floor, Block-F, Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacl7814N Acit, Vs. M/S. Lvmh Watch & Circle-4(1), Jewellery India Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi International Trade Tower, 301-302, 3Rd Floor, Block-F, Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacl7814N Assessee By : Shri Tapas Ram Mishra, Adv Shri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, Ar Shri Sahil Malhotra, Ar Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit Dr Shri Gaurav Bansal, Sr. Dr Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21/10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Tapas Ram Mishra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 4Section 91(1)Section 91(4)

before the passing of the orders, the assessee filed a letter dated 16.10.24 before us stating that it would be availing the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 introduced by the Statute to settle the tax disputes prevailing in these years. Accordingly, vide letter dated 16.10.24, the assessee made a prayer ... this Bench not to pronounce the orders so as to enable the assessee to avail the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. We find that this request of the assessee to be fair keeping in mind the intention of the Government of India to resolve the various direct tax disputes pending

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Lvmh Watch & Jewellery India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3643/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Oct 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. M/S. Lvmh Watch & Circle-4(1), Jewellery India Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi International Trade Tower, 301-302, 3Rd Floor, Block-F, Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacl7814N M/S. Lvmh Watch & Vs. Dcit, Jewellery India Pvt. Ltd, Circle-4(1), International Trade New Delhi Tower, 301-302, 3Rd Floor, Block-F, Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacl7814N Acit, Vs. M/S. Lvmh Watch & Circle-4(1), Jewellery India Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi International Trade Tower, 301-302, 3Rd Floor, Block-F, Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacl7814N Assessee By : Shri Tapas Ram Mishra, Adv Shri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, Ar Shri Sahil Malhotra, Ar Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit Dr Shri Gaurav Bansal, Sr. Dr Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21/10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Tapas Ram Mishra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 4Section 91(1)Section 91(4)

before the passing of the orders, the assessee filed a letter dated 16.10.24 before us stating that it would be availing the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 introduced by the Statute to settle the tax disputes prevailing in these years. Accordingly, vide letter dated 16.10.24, the assessee made a prayer ... this Bench not to pronounce the orders so as to enable the assessee to avail the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. We find that this request of the assessee to be fair keeping in mind the intention of the Government of India to resolve the various direct tax disputes pending

Upendra Chinubhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 729/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 68Section 69C

earlier years. The Ld. Sr. D.R., Mr. Bhavnasingh Gupta, came up with a reply that the assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme as against the Department appeals filed for the Asst. Years 2012-13 to 2015-16. Thus the assessee has accepted the issue of unsecured loans ... revenue’s appeals were dismissed vide order dated 25-02-2021 since the assessee has availed Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. For assessment year 2015-16, Department’s appeal in ITA 2323/Ahd/2018 was dismissed vide order dated 22- 02-2021 since the assessee has availed the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme

The Bharat Line Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6867/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms Kaveeta Punit Kaushik, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 5(2)Section 6

During the appellate proceedings before us, at the outset, the ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee has filed application under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. In this regard, the ld. Counsel has also filed copy of Form No.5 dated 11th June, 2021 issued by the PCIT, Mumbai ... respect of full and final settlement of tax arrears u/s 5(2) r.w.s. section 6 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 2 The Bharat Line Ltd. A.Y. 2010-11 3. In view of the above facts and submissions of the assessee, the appeal filed by the assessee

Ashish Mahendra Chandiwal, Jalgaon vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Jalgaon

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 952/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh P Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 5Section 5(1)

learned 'PCIT Nasik 1' erred in issuing notice U/S 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 where Appellant has already opted for Vivad Se Vishwas, 2020 and paid taxes and form 3 i.e., certificate U/S 5(1) if Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas 2020 is issued on 07/02/2021 and form ... filed by Appellant on 19/02/2021. b) Learned PCIT failed to appreciate and ought to have held that in view of sec. 5 of Vivad Se Vishwas, 2020, he has no revisional powers for the assessment year for Appellant has opted Vivad Se Vishwas, 2020. c) In view of the above

Vimla Devi Meena, Dausa vs. ITO Ward- Dausa, Dausa

ITA 1034/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sarwan Kumar Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Chaudhary, JCIT D/R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 234ASection 250

facts of the case in dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the wrong allegation that the assessee has gone in “Vivad Se Vishwas Sceme /act 2020”, while assessee has not adopted or gone in “Vivad Se Vishwas Sceme /Act 2020” against this quantum Appeal. Further the date of hearing ... dt.20.07.2023. However the ld. CIT(A) has passed the order on dt. 17.07.2023, on wrong allegation that the assessee has gone in “Vivad Se Vishwas Sceme /act 4 Smt. Vimla Devi Meena, Dausa. 2020”, while I have not adopted or gone in “Vivad Se Vishwas Sceme /Act 2020” against this

DCIT 13(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Riva Resorts Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1343/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Riva Resorts Pvt. Ltd., – 13(3)(2), A 306, Radhakrishna Vs. Mumbai Apartments, Dahisar S.O., Mumbai – 400068 (Pan : Aadcr2341B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Ms. Gunjan Kakkad & Mr. Fenil Bhat, A.Rs

For Appellant: Ms. Gunjan Kakkad and Mr. Fenil Bhat, A.RsFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 801DSection 80I

ignoring the fact that the assessee's claim in A.Y. 2015-16 was dismissed by the CITIA) as assesseee had opted for Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and not contested the addition made by AO. 2 Riva Resorts Pvt. Ltd., AY 2016-17 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances ... passed by the then Ld. Commissioner/NFAC's order for the A.Y. 2015-16 demonstrated that in that case the Assessee had opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) and therefore the Assessee's appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by the then Ld. Commissioner. 8.7. The Assessee by producing the order

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Kanpur vs. Shri Mayank Agnihotri, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 158/LKW/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriadcit-2 Mayank Agnihotri V. 16/69, Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd E-20, Anand Cottage, Floor, Civil Lines, Kanpur- 117/K/13, Gutaiya 208001. Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur. Pan:Abnpa5018J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 25 09 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 26 09 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl

permission on behalf of the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the assessee has opted for settling the dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 and has received certificate in Form 5 vide order dated 31/05/2021. In fact, the assessee has also sent letter dated 25.04.2024 (kept

Subash Chand, Kaithal vs. Income Tax Officer, Kaithal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 401/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pulkit Saini, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2Section 234ASection 4

dismissing the appeal ex parte without any request being made by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) for withdrawal of appeal under Vivad Se Vishwas. 3. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in in not appreciating that the declarartion/Form 3 under the Direct ... Vivad Se Vishwas Act is null and void in case of non payment of requisite amount. 4. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that the impugned assessment order was bad in law in the absence of issuance of mandatory notice

Authorgen Technologies Private Limited, Punjab vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh-1, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 541/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Krinwant Sahay & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 541/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Authrogen Technologies Vs. The Pcit, बनाम Chandigarh-1, Private Limited, Chandigarh C-203, 8Th Floor, World Tech Power, Industrial Area, Phase Viii, Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadca0494Q अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent (Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri K M Gupta, Advocate & Shri Jaskaran Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri K M Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 263(2)Section 68

Section 263 of the Act without 541-Chd-2024 – Authorgen Technologies Private Limited, Gurgaon 4 appreciating the fact that the case settled under Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 cannot be subsequently disturbed byinitiating revision proceedings. All the above grounds are without prejudice to each other. The Appellant craves leave

Mansi A. Sheth, Mumbai vs. ITO 29 (2)(3), Mumbai

Appeals are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience

ITA 7256/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Niraj SoniFor Respondent: Smt. R.M. Brindha, Addl. JCIT

convenience. 3. At the very outset, the Counsel for the assessee stated that the tax dispute has been settled under the Direct Tax ‘Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020’, therefore, the assessee may be allowed to withdraw the appeal. 4. On such concession both these appeals are dismissed as withdrawn. Order

Mansi A. Sheth, Mumbai vs. ITO 29 (2)(3), Mumbai

Appeals are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience

ITA 6214/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Niraj SoniFor Respondent: Smt. R.M. Brindha, Addl. JCIT

convenience. 3. At the very outset, the Counsel for the assessee stated that the tax dispute has been settled under the Direct Tax ‘Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020’, therefore, the assessee may be allowed to withdraw the appeal. 4. On such concession both these appeals are dismissed as withdrawn. Order

M/S Ufv India Global Education (Society), Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Exemption Circle-1, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 516/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 516/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S Ufv India Global Vs. The Dcit Exemption, Circle-1, Education, बनाम Chandigarh Ggd Sanatan Dharma College, Ector 32-C, Chandigarh (U.T.) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcu7691M अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.08.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 8

pending before the CIT(A), the assessee in order to buy peace of mind decided to end all pending litigations and opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSV) of the department for Asstt. Years 2016-17 & 2017-18 and by virtue of that, paid substantial amount ... certain general details were asked for and by that time, the assessee had already availed the benefit of the sheme of the department Vivad Se Vishwas for Asstt. Year 2016-17 & 2017-18 on 18.05.2020 and surrendered its claim of exemption u/s 11 vide letter dated 26.10.2020 as per chart

Sajjan Kumar Bansal, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-37(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1466/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1466/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sajjan Kumar Bansal……………....................………………....Appellant 125, B K Pual Avenue, West Bengal-700006. [Pan: Advpb8045Q] Vs. Ito, Ward-37(4), Kolkata.……………….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vinod Jain, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Abhishek Kumar, Jcit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 06, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 12.05.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Under Mistaken Belief That The Assessee Has Availed Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 & He Treated The Appeal Has Deemed To Be Withdrawn As Per Clause 2 Of Section 4 Of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. However, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Submitted That The Assessee Had Availed Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme In Respect Of Earlier Assessment Order Dated 31.03.2015 U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act. Thereafter, The Assessment Was Again Reopened U/S 147 Of The Act And

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 4

dismissed the appeal of the assessee under mistaken belief that the assessee has availed Vivad Se Vishwas scheme, 2020 and he treated the appeal has deemed to be withdrawn as per clause 2 of section 4 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. However, the ld. counsel ... assessee has submitted that the assessee had availed Vivad Se Vishwas scheme in respect of earlier assessment order dated 31.03.2015 u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act. Thereafter, the assessment was again reopened u/s 147 of the Act and I.T.A. No.1466/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sajjan Kumar Bansal

Astt. Commisioner of Income Tax, Lucknow vs. M/S Apco Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed, as indicated above

ITA 66/LKW/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. D. Padamahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2014-15 The Asstt. Commissioner V. M/S Apco Infratech Pvt. Ltd Of Income Tax B-9, Vibhuti Khand Central Circle Ii Gomti Nagar Lucnow Lucknow Pan:Aadca5639H (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.19/Lkw/2017 [In Ita No.66/Lkw/2017] Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Apco Infratech Pvt. Ltd V. The Asstt. Commissioner Of B-9, Vibhuti Khand Income Tax Gomti Nagar Central Circle Ii Lucknow Lucnow Pan:Aadca5639H (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Kumar Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Neil Jain, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 80Section 80I

assessee is concerned, during the course of physical hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee opted for Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) in relation to its cross objection in Form No 1 and Form No 2. Pursuant thereto, a certificate in Form ... under VSVS. 24. As per copy of Form No.3 (Form for Certificate under sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020) dated 23.12.2020 issued to the assessee by the designated authority, i.e., Ld. PCIT, Lucknow-1, the assessee opted for Direct Tax Vivad

Bisseswarlal Mannalal & Sons., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-33, Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1136/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1136/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Bisseswarlal Mannalal & Sons...................………………....Appellant 12, Pretoria Street, 5Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 071. [Pan: Aacfb7736L] Vs. Acit, Circle-33, Kolkata.……………….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sailen Samaddar, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 06, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 04, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.08.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Under Mistaken Belief That The Assessee Has Availed Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 & He Treated The Appeal Has Deemed To Be Withdrawn As Per Clause 2 Of Section 4 Of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. However, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Submitted That The Assessee Had Availed Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme In Respect Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Dated 10.03.14. Thereafter, The Assessment Was Reopened U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of The Act 23.03.16. The Ld. Counsel Has Submitted That The Assessee

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 4

dismissed the appeal of the assessee under mistaken belief that the assessee has availed Vivad Se Vishwas scheme, 2020 and he treated the appeal has deemed to be withdrawn as per clause 2 of section 4 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. However, the ld. counsel ... assessee has submitted that the assessee had availed Vivad Se Vishwas scheme in respect of order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 10.03.14. Thereafter, the assessment was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act 23.03.16. The ld. counsel has submitted that

Authorgen Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Mohali vs. ITO, Ward 6(1), Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA NO

ITA 212/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.S. Kahlon, CIT, DR &
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

23/01/2019. In the meantime, before the appeal could be taken up for adjudication by the Id CIT(A), the assessee opted for Vivad Se Vishwas (VSV) Scheme 2020 and filed Form No. 1 on 29/01/2021 before the Competent authority. Thereafter after issuance of Form No. 3 dt. 09/02/2021 ... resident investors as well as Venture Capital Fund. 17. It was further submitted that the assessee has already settled its case under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 and withdraw its appeal pending before the Ld. CIT(A) which was duly allowed. It was submitted that once the case is settled

M/S Authorgen Technologies Pvt.Ltd, Mohali vs. Pr.CIT-1, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA NO

ITA 171/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.S. Kahlon, CIT, DR &
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

23/01/2019. In the meantime, before the appeal could be taken up for adjudication by the Id CIT(A), the assessee opted for Vivad Se Vishwas (VSV) Scheme 2020 and filed Form No. 1 on 29/01/2021 before the Competent authority. Thereafter after issuance of Form No. 3 dt. 09/02/2021 ... resident investors as well as Venture Capital Fund. 17. It was further submitted that the assessee has already settled its case under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 and withdraw its appeal pending before the Ld. CIT(A) which was duly allowed. It was submitted that once the case is settled