GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CORPORATION, GURGAON V. D.D.I.T.(I.T.)-3(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2576/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7346 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 year(s) 8 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-01-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 14-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: AMEYA PANT
• Section: 143(3); 144C; 13

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 2576/MUM/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 PAGE 1 OF 3 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI I BENCH, MUMBAI [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR (VICE PRESIDENT) AND SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER)] ITA NO. 2576/MUM/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CORPORATION .APPELLANT BUILDING NO 7A, 6 TH FLOOR, DLF CYBER CITY, DLF PHASE - III, SEC 25A, GURGAON 122002. [PAN: AACCG0933H] VS DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 3(1), MUMBAI. ..........RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY AMEYA PANT FOR THE APPELLANT SANJAY SINGH FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CON CLUDING THE HEARING : JANUARY 13 , 2021 DATE OF PRON OUNCEMENT : JANUARY 1 4 , 2021 ORDER PER BENCH: - 1. THIS APPEAL, FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, CALLS INTO QUESTION THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 14 TH FEBRUARY 2012, PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) - 15, MUMBAI IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT U/S. 144C (3) R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09 . 2. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITT ED THAT HE HAS FILED THE NECESSARY DECLARATION UNDER DIRECT TAX VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT, 2020 (ACT 3 OF 2020) AND IS AWAITING FOR FINAL RESOLUTION OF THE MATTER UNDER THE SAID SCHEME. HE SUBMITTED THAT UPON COMPLETION OF THE NECESSARY FORMALITIES, HE WILL WIT HDRAW THE APPEAL. IN ITA NO. 2576/MUM/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 PAGE 2 OF 3 RESPONSE TO THE SUGGESTION FROM THE BENCH, HE FAIRLY ACCEPTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE APPEAL BEING DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN AS LONG AS HIS RIGHT FOR REVIVAL OF THE APPEAL ARE PROTECTED, IN THE EVENT OF, FOR SOME UNFORESEEN REASON , THE MATTER BEING NOT SETTLED UNDER THE VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME. 3. THE LD. DR ALSO DID NOT OBJECT TO COURSE SO SUGGESTED. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL AS WITHDRAWN, SUBJECT TO BE RIDER THAT IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT OF MATTER NOT BEING RESOLVED UNDER THE VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME, THE ASSESSEE SHALL HAVE LIBERTY TO APPROACH THE TRIBUNAL FOR RESTORATION OF HIS APPEAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN SUBJECT TO THE OBSERVATION ABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TO DAY ON THE 1 4 JANUARY, 2021. S D / - S D / - SAKTIJIT DEY PRAMOD K UMAR ( JUDICIAL MEMBER ) (VICE PRESIDENT) MUMBAI, DATED THE 1 4 DAY OF JANUARY, 2021 N.V, SR. PS COPIES TO: (1) THE APPLICANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT( A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI ITA NO. 2576/MUM/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 PAGE 3 OF 3