Shri Nitesh Ratanchandra Jain, Vadodara V. ITO, Ward-3(1)(3), Vadodara

ITA 2178/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0463 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 25-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAURYA S. SHUKLA
• Section: 2; 143(3)

Judgement Text

, SMC IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 2178/AHD/2018 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16) SHRI NITESH RATANCHANDRA JAIN 4/B KHANDERAO COLONY, NR. GANGOTRI APPT., R.V DESAI ROAD,VADODARA-390001 / VS. ITO WARD-3(1)(3), AAYKAR BHAVAN, RACE CIRCLE, VADODARA ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : ALWPJ5374K ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI JIMI PATEL, AR / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SAURYA S. SHUKLA, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING 07/12/2020 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 22/12/2020 $%/ O R D E R PER BENCH: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-3, VADODARA (CIT(A) IN SHORT), DATED 19.09.2018 ARIS ING IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 21.11.2017 PASSED BY THE ITO, WARD-3(1) (3), VADODARA UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (T HE ACT) CONCERNING AY 2015-16. 2. THE CAPTIONED ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT TO WITHDRAW TH E APPEAL LISTED ABOVE ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS OPTED TO AVAI L BENEFITS OF VIVAD ITA NO. 2178/AHD/18 [SHRI NITESHRATANCHANDRA JAIN VS. ITO] A.Y. 2015-16 - 2 - SE VISHWAS SCHEME, 2020 (VSV). AS PER LETTER DATED 23.03.2020 FILED BY ASSESSEE, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE DOES NOT SEEK TO PURSUE THE SAID APPEAL OWING TO EXERCISE OF OPTION FOR AVAILING VSV SCHEME AND CONSEQUENTLY REQUESTED THAT ASSESSEES APPLICATION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL MAY PLEASE BE GRANTED. 3. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVE NUE STATED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION TO WITHDRAW THE APPEALS IN THE CIR CUMSTANCES NARRATED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE LIGHT OF WRITTEN REQUESTS MADE ON BEHALF OF THE CAPTIONED PARTY, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. HOWEV ER, IN THE EVENT, THE ASSESSEE FAILS TO AVAIL THE BENEFIT OF VSV SCHEME F OR ANY BONAFIDE REASONS, THEN THE ASSESSEE CONCERNED WILL BE AT LIB ERTY TO SEEK RESTORATION OF ORIGINAL APPEAL FOR HEARING BEFORE ITAT IN ACCOR DANCE WITH LAW. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE CAPTIONED APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. SD/- SD/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 22/12/2020 TRUE COPY TANMAY !' #' / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / REVENUE 2. $ / ASSESSEE 3. ) *+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4. ,- / CIT (A) 5. 012 33*+, *+#, 56$)$ / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 289 : / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / $% , ;/5 *+#, 56$)$ < THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 22/12 /2020