M/S ACID & CHEMICALS CO V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XVIII

TAXAP/484/2011

AI Insights

The case involves M/S Acid & Chemicals Co, the appellant, who appealed against the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XVIII regarding a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for an addition of investment upheld under Section 68. The substantial question of law admitted by the court was whether the Tribunal was correct in law in upholding this penalty. However, the appellant decided to withdraw the appeal to benefit from the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, a government initiative aimed at resolving tax disputes. The court allowed the withdrawal of the appeal without discussing the merits of the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 763854 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2021
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Section 271(1)(c), Section 68
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: MANISH BHATT
• Assessee Lawyers: KETAN SHAH
• Keywords: Assessment appeal; Investment; Penalty; Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme
• Section: 271(1)(c); 68

Judgement Text

"C/TAXAP/484/2011 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 484 of 2011 ========================================================== M/S ACID & CHEMICALS CO Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XVIII ========================================================== Appearance: MR KETAN H SHAH(2705) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED(64) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 LD SR ADV.MR.MANISH BHATT for the Opponent (s) No.1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Date : 28/10/2021 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI) 1 . F o r c o n s i d e r i n g t h e s u b s t a n t i a l q u e s t i o n o f l a w o n 2 5 . 0 1 . 2 0 1 2 , t h i s C o u r t h a s a d m i t t e d t h i s a p p e a l . F o l l o w i n g i s t h e s u b s t a n t i a l q u e s t i o n o f l a w . “(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) in respect of the addition of investment which it upheld under Section 68 in the hands of the assessee in assessment appeal?” 2 . L e a r n e d a d v o c a t e , M r . K e t a n S h a h s u b m i t s Page 1 of 2 C/TAXAP/484/2011 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021 t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t i s d e s i r o u s o f a v a i l i n g t h e b e n e f i t o f V i v a d S e V i s h w a s S c h e m e a n d F o r m N o . 3 h a s a l r e a d y b e e n r e c e i v e d . O n c e h e w i t h d r a w s t h e p e n d i n g t a x a p p e a l , h e w i l l b e g i v e n t h e F o r m N o . 4 a n d t h e r e f o r e , t h e C o u r t m a y p e r m i t t o w i t h d r a w t h e p r e s e n t a p p e a l . 3 . A c c e d i n g t o t h e r e q u e s t , t h e T a x A p p e a l i s d i s p o s e d o f a s n o t p r e s s e d , w i t h o u t e n t e r i n g i n t o t h e m e r i t s a n d e x p r e s s i n g a n y o p i n i o n . 4 . I f f o r s o m e r e a s o n s t h e a p p e l l a n t i s u n a b l e t o a v a i l t h e b e n e f i t o f t h e s c h e m e , i t s h a l l b e o p e n f o r t h e a p p e l l a n t t o t a k e l e g a l r e c o u r s e , a v a i l a b l e u n d e r t h e l a w . Sd/- (SONIA GOKANI, J) Sd/- (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) M.M.MIRZA Page 2 of 2 "