← All Phrases

“direct tax vivad se vishwas”

Settlement & AmnestyDTVSV 2020DTVSV 20202,154 judgments

Judgments citing direct tax vivad se vishwas

Ms. Genpact India, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the

ITA 4060/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 10ASection 143(3)

fairly submitted that all litigations that arose from A.Y. 2002-03 to A.Y. 2010-11 had been settled by the assessee under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. He drew the attention of the Bench to Explanation given in Section 5(3) of Vivad Se Vishwas

I.T.O., Ward-1(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Gabhawala Tax Advisors Pvt. Ltd.(Formerly Known As M/S Ostrich Tie Up Pvt. Ltd.), Gurubagh

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed being infructuous

ITA 1831/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: N on eFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 5(2)Section 6Section 68

Kolkata which is an order of full and final settlement of tax arrear u/s. 5(2) read with section 6 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (3 of 2020) read with the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Rules, 2020. Hence, in view of the fact that assessee ... availed the benefit of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, the appeal filed becomes infructuous in view of 3 M/s. Gabhawala Tax Advisors Pvt. Ltd. AY: 2011-12. Form No. 5 issued by the Pr. CIT-1, Kolkata and the same being infructuous is hereby dismissed

Swallow Associates LLP, Mumbai vs. I.T.O WD - 17(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 950/KOL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos.928 & 950/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Swallow Associates Llp Ito, Ward-17(3)(4), Mumbai Rpg House, 463, Dr. Vs Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400030. Pan: Aaacr 5115 J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Krish Desai, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.K. Singh, Jcit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.04.2024 O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Vi, Kolkata Dated 18.02.2013 & 22.02.2013 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Krish Desai, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 5(2)Section 6

this case, ld. counsel for the assessee has moved an application informing us that the appeals have been settled under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The assessee has duly filed the copy of the certificate in Form 5 for full and final settlement of tax arrear under ... section 5(2) read with section 6 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. A.Y. 2007-08 3. Per contra, the ld. DR did not have any objection in this regard. 4. Keeping in view these facts and circumstances of the case including especially the fact that

Swallow Associates LLP, Mumbai vs. I.T.O WD - 17(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 928/KOL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos.928 & 950/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Swallow Associates Llp Ito, Ward-17(3)(4), Mumbai Rpg House, 463, Dr. Vs Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400030. Pan: Aaacr 5115 J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Krish Desai, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.K. Singh, Jcit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.04.2024 O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Vi, Kolkata Dated 18.02.2013 & 22.02.2013 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Krish Desai, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 5(2)Section 6

this case, ld. counsel for the assessee has moved an application informing us that the appeals have been settled under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The assessee has duly filed the copy of the certificate in Form 5 for full and final settlement of tax arrear under ... section 5(2) read with section 6 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. A.Y. 2007-08 3. Per contra, the ld. DR did not have any objection in this regard. 4. Keeping in view these facts and circumstances of the case including especially the fact that

Nidhi Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 44 (7), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 135/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 271(1)(c)Section 5(2)Section 6

Department in ITA no. 1716/Del/2019 is liable to be dismissed in view of the settlement of corresponding quantum appeal under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 3. Learned DR could not controvert the fact that the assessee ha settled the dispute in quantum proceedings under the Vivad Se ... learned representative for the assessee referred to Form 3 issued by the Competent Authority in terms of Section 5(1) of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 qua the settling of dispute on quantum in ITA No. 589/Del/2017 ; therefore, it is submitted that the appeal be permitted

Syed Karimulla, Rajampet vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Cuddapah

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

ITA 149/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Syed Karimulla, Nandalur, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Rajampet, Ward – 1, D.No.5-98-C, C/O.Shaik Cuddapah Mastan Vali, Near Nandalur Bus Stand, Andhra Pradesh – 516510. Pan : Fddps8691Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Abhiroop Bhargav, C.A. Revenue By: Shri B. Yadagiri, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 07.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri Abhiroop Bhargav, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Yadagiri, SR.AR
Section 115Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234ASection 234BSection 69ASection 80CSection 80T

ld.CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of assessee as withdrawn in view of assessee’s submission of Form-3 dt.10.02.201 under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. 3 6. Before us, ld. AR submitted that the ld.CIT(A) has not decided the issue on merits and was swayed ... should have decided the issue in accordance with law. Further, from the reading of provisions of sections 4 and 5 of the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, it is apparently clear that after issuance of Form III / Certificate of tax demand, the appeal shall be deemed to have

DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai vs. M/S.Minal Constractors and Builders Pvt Lit., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 646/CHNY/2023[2021-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2021-23

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.642/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Mukunda Land Developers Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Investigation Building, Sai Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aahcp7751K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.643/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Mugilan Structurals Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Sai Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Vs. Investigation Building, Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aajcm3182D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.644/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Mac Quality Builders Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Sai Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Investigation Building, Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Vs. Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aaecv8582B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 2(22)(e)

Supreme Court to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for constitution of a larger bench by opting under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. In this regard, the Ld. Counsel furnished the copy of order dated 10.08.2021 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Interlocutory Application ... submission of the ld. Counsel that since the case of National Travel Services v. CIT (supra) has been settled under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, no binding precedent arises from such judgement and accordingly submitted that the case of CIT v. Ankitech (P.) Ltd (supra) as affirmed

DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai vs. M/S. Meadow Infrastructure Pvt Lit., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 645/CHNY/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.642/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Mukunda Land Developers Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Investigation Building, Sai Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aahcp7751K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.643/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Mugilan Structurals Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Sai Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Vs. Investigation Building, Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aajcm3182D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.644/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Mac Quality Builders Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Sai Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Investigation Building, Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Vs. Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aaecv8582B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 2(22)(e)

Supreme Court to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for constitution of a larger bench by opting under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. In this regard, the Ld. Counsel furnished the copy of order dated 10.08.2021 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Interlocutory Application ... submission of the ld. Counsel that since the case of National Travel Services v. CIT (supra) has been settled under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, no binding precedent arises from such judgement and accordingly submitted that the case of CIT v. Ankitech (P.) Ltd (supra) as affirmed

DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai vs. M/S.Mac Quality Builders Pvt Lit., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 644/CHNY/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.642/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Mukunda Land Developers Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Investigation Building, Sai Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aahcp7751K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.643/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Mugilan Structurals Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Sai Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Vs. Investigation Building, Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aajcm3182D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.644/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Mac Quality Builders Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Sai Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Investigation Building, Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Vs. Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aaecv8582B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 2(22)(e)

Supreme Court to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for constitution of a larger bench by opting under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. In this regard, the Ld. Counsel furnished the copy of order dated 10.08.2021 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Interlocutory Application ... submission of the ld. Counsel that since the case of National Travel Services v. CIT (supra) has been settled under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, no binding precedent arises from such judgement and accordingly submitted that the case of CIT v. Ankitech (P.) Ltd (supra) as affirmed

DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai vs. M/S. Mukilanstructurals Pvt Lit., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 643/CHNY/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.642/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Mukunda Land Developers Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Investigation Building, Sai Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aahcp7751K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.643/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Mugilan Structurals Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Sai Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Vs. Investigation Building, Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aajcm3182D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.644/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Mac Quality Builders Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Sai Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Investigation Building, Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Vs. Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aaecv8582B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 2(22)(e)

Supreme Court to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for constitution of a larger bench by opting under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. In this regard, the Ld. Counsel furnished the copy of order dated 10.08.2021 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Interlocutory Application ... submission of the ld. Counsel that since the case of National Travel Services v. CIT (supra) has been settled under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, no binding precedent arises from such judgement and accordingly submitted that the case of CIT v. Ankitech (P.) Ltd (supra) as affirmed

DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai vs. M/S. Mukunda Land Developers Pvt Lit., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 642/CHNY/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.642/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Mukunda Land Developers Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Investigation Building, Sai Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aahcp7751K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.643/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Mugilan Structurals Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Sai Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Vs. Investigation Building, Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aajcm3182D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.644/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Mac Quality Builders Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 198, 13Th Cross Street, Sri Sai Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Investigation Building, Nagar, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Vs. Chennai 34. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aaecv8582B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 2(22)(e)

Supreme Court to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for constitution of a larger bench by opting under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. In this regard, the Ld. Counsel furnished the copy of order dated 10.08.2021 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Interlocutory Application ... submission of the ld. Counsel that since the case of National Travel Services v. CIT (supra) has been settled under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, no binding precedent arises from such judgement and accordingly submitted that the case of CIT v. Ankitech (P.) Ltd (supra) as affirmed

M/S Ratnadeep Multitrade Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Department, NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3561/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant S. PathakFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 4

2589/Mum/2018. It is further submitted that during the pendency of filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (“the VSV Act”) was introduced whereby the appeal pending as on 31/01/2020 can be settled by the assessee. Accordingly, the assessee filed

Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

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

ITA 995/BANG/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2006-07 M/S. Texas Instrument (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 66/3, Bagmane Tech Park, C. V. Raman Circle – 7(1)(1), Nagar, S. O, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 093. Pan : Aaact 5445 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Ketan Ved, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Subramanian S, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 18.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Ketan Ved, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 260ASection 4(2)Section 40

appeal on the inaccurate assumption that the Appellant opted for the Vivad Page 2 of 5 Se Vishwas ('VSV') Scheme under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 ('the VSV Act'), in relation to such appeal. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in making an incorrect reference ... view of the above, the appeal is treated as infructuous as per clause sub- section (2) of section 4 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act (DTVSVA), 2020.” 8. We have already found that the assessee had only settled the matter under DTVSVA, 2020, in respect of proceedings that

Interglobe Aviation Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 12(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3397/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Siddharth, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 4(2)Section 4(6)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 5(2)

facts and in law the CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal by erroneously holding that the appellant has opted for Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme Act 2020. 2.1 That on facts and in the law. the CIT(A) has erred in holding that Appeal No.Delhi-4/10656/2019-20 ... treated as withdrawn by the appellant" in accordance with provisions of section 4(2) of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 2.2 That on facts and in law the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that: (a) There was no culmination of the proceedings initiated under

Interglobe Aviation Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 12(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3396/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Siddharth, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 4(2)Section 4(6)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 5(2)

facts and in law the CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal by erroneously holding that the appellant has opted for Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme Act 2020. 2.1 That on facts and in the law. the CIT(A) has erred in holding that Appeal No.Delhi-4/10656/2019-20 ... treated as withdrawn by the appellant" in accordance with provisions of section 4(2) of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 2.2 That on facts and in law the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that: (a) There was no culmination of the proceedings initiated under

DCIT-1(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 3913/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jan 2024AY 2014-15
For Respondent: Date
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 154Section 250

appeals pertaining to Assessment Year 2014-15 and 2015-16 were dismissed as the Assessee had opted for settling the dispute under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. However, vide order dated 28/01/2022, passed in Miscellaneous Applications preferred by the Revenue (MA Nos. 253 to 257/Mum/2021), the aforesaid order

Hindustan Petroleum Corp Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 3195/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: us. 2.

For Appellant: Shri P.J. PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 154Section 250

appeals pertaining to Assessment Year 2014-15 and 2015-16 were dismissed as the Assessee had opted for settling the dispute under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. However, vide order dated 28/01/2022, passed in Miscellaneous Applications preferred by the Revenue (MA Nos. 253 to 257/Mum/2021), the aforesaid order

Adroitec Information System P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), New Delhio

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

ITA 2472/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaadroitec Information System P. Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 1 (1), A – 43A, Shop No.3, New Delhi. Panchsheel Vihar, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi – 110 017. (Pan : Aaach2422A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nitin Goyal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.01.2024 Date Of Order : 10.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 154

circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in treating the appeal infructuous by invoking provisions of Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act 2020 (DTVsVs). 2.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in not appreciating ... Form No.5 dated 10.06.2021. In view of the above, the appeal is treated as infructuous as per clause 6 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 3.0 Accordingly, the appeal is treated as dismissed for statistical purposes.” 4. Against the above order, the assessee is in appeal before

Capital Automotives Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-5(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 820/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: the Competent Authority under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Hence, we do not deem it fit to keep this file pending with us and proceed to dismiss the appeal of the assessee with liberty given to the assessee that in the event of Vivad Se Vishwas application not being accepted by the Revenue for whatever reasons, this appeal preferred by the assessee shall get restored an an application made by the assessee. With these observations, the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed. 3. In the resu

Section 147

find that the Ld. AR submitted a letter on the previous date of hearing stating that the assessee had already availed Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and had settled the dispute relatable to this assessment year under consideration. However, Form No.5 to complete the process of Vivad Se Vishwas

Everest Food Products Pvt Ltd(Formerly Known As S. Narendrakumar and Co.), Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax -51, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2482/MUM/2023[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2023

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 132Section 143(3)

decision of Ld CIT(A) in dismissing the appeals on the reasoning that the assessee has opted to settle the disputes under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 2. The Ld A.R submitted that the assessing officer has passed two assessment orders in respect of these years. He submitted