MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA LIMITED COMPANY, Mumbai V. ACIT CIRCLE 2(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2427/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5508 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY J SETHI
• Assessee Lawyers: RADHA SAMPAT
• Keywords: Question of law; Competent authority; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (V I RTUAL COURT) , D BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH , JM ITA NO. 2427/ MUM/ 20 19 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 01 - 02 ) M/S. MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA LIMITED MAHINDRA TOWERS, CORPO RATE TAXATION DEPT. P.K. KURNE CHOWK WORLI, MUMBAI - 400 018 VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2)(2) MUMBAI PAN/GIR NO. AAACM3025E (APPELLANT ) .. (RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY SHRI RADHA SAMPAT REVENUE BY SHRI SANJAY J. SETHI DATE OF HEARI NG 01 / 02 /202 1 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 01 / 02 /202 1 / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M) : THIS APPEAL IN ITA NO. 2427/MUM/2019 FOR A.Y. 2001 - 02 ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 5, MUMBAI IN APPEAL N O. CIT(A) - 5/ACIT - 2(2)(2)/IT - 8/17 - 18 DATED 18/02/2019 (LD. CIT(A) IN SHORT) AGAINST THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S.154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS ACT) DATED 31/03/2017 ITA NO . 2427/MUM/2019 M/S. MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA LTD., 2 BY THE LD. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2)( 2), MUMBAI (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS LD. AO). 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI RADHA SAMPAT STATED THAT ASSESSEE HAD ALREADY AVAILED VIVAD SE VISHWAS 2020 SCHEME AND FILED NECESSARY DECLARATION. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUS ED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAD ALREADY AVAILED VIVAD SE VISWAS SCHEME 2020 AND FILED NECESSARY DECLARATION . WE FIND THERE IS NO NEED TO KEEP THIS APPEAL PENDING BEFORE US IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF M ADRAS IN THE CASE OF NANNUSAMY MOHAN (HUF) VS. ACIT IN T.C.A. NO.372 OF 2020 DATED 16.10.2020, WHEREIN HON'BLE HIGH COURT AFTER CONSIDERING THE INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE TO AVAIL THE BENEFIT OF VIVAD SE VISWAS SCHEME - 2020 (VSV SCHEME), HAD DISMISSED THE APPEAL BY OBSERVING IN PARA 7 TO 9 AS UNDER: - 7. AS OBSERVED, THE ASSESSEE IS GIVEN LIBERTY TO RESTORE THIS APPEAL IN THE EVENT THE ULTIMATE DECISION TO BE TAKEN ON THE DECLARATION TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE SAID ACT IS NOT IN FAV OUR OF THE ASSESSEE. IF SUCH A PRAYER IS MADE, THE REGISTRY SHALL ENTERTAIN THE PRAYER WITHOUT INSISTING UPON ANY APPLICATION TO BE FILED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN RESTORATION OF THE APPEAL AND ON SUCH REQUEST MADE BY THE ASSESSEE BY FILING A MISCELLANEO US PETITION FOR RESTORATION, THE REGISTRY SHALL PLACE SUCH PETITION BEFORE THE DIVISION BENCH FOR ORDERS. 8. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE, WE DIRECT THE APPELLANT/ ASSESSEE TO FILE THE FORM NO.I ON OR BEFORE 20.11.2020 AND THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY SHALL PROCES S THE APPLICATION/ DECLARATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE PREFERABLY WITHIN A PERIOD OF 6 (6) WEEKS FROM THE DATE ON WHICH THE DECLARATION IS FILED IN THE PROPER FORM. 9. WITH THIS DECLARATION, THE TAX CASE APPEAL STANDS DISPOSED OF WITH THE AFOREMENTIONED LIBERTY AND CONSEQUENTLY THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ARE LEFT UPON. NO COSTS. ITA NO . 2427/MUM/2019 M/S. MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA LTD., 3 2 . IN THE LIGHT OF THE VIEW TAKEN BY HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT CITED (SUPRA), WE ALSO GIVE LIBERTY TO THE ASSESSEE T O GET THE APPEAL RESTORED IN THE EVENT THAT THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT SUCCEED ON THE DECLARATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER DIRECT TAX VIVAD SE VISWAS SCHEME - 2020. IN OTHER WORDS IF THE ASSESSEES DECLARATION TO BE FILED IS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE FOR A NY REASON WHATSOEVER, THE ASSESSEE CAN MAKE A PRAYER BEFORE THE BENCH FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER BY FILING A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR RESTORATION OF APPEAL. THE REGISTRY WILL PLACE SUCH PETITION BEFORE THE BENCH CONCERNED. 3 . IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID OBS ERVATIONS, WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE WITH A LIBERTY TO GET THE APPEAL RECALLED IN THE EVENTUALITY OF ASSESSEES DECLARATION (TO BE FILED) NOT GETTING ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE. 4 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNC ED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01 / 02 /202 1. SD/ - ( AMARJIT SINGH ) SD/ - (M.BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED 01 / 02/ 2021 KARUNA , SR.PS ITA NO . 2427/MUM/2019 M/S. MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA LTD., 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWAR DED TO : BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//