RAYMOND LTD, MUMBAI V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1) , MUMBAI

ITA 3576/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4899 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 24-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: AGAINST TH E DATED PASSED
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH , AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM / I .T.A. NO. 3576 / MUM/ 201 8 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 1 1 - 12 ) RAYMOND LTD. NEW HIND HOUSE, NAROTTAM MORARJEE MARG, BALLARD ESTATE, MUMBAI - 400001 . / VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(1) 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI - 400020. ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAACR 4896 A ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / DATE OF HEARING: 02 / 0 2 / 20 2 1 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 02 / 02 / 20 21 / O R D E R PER A MARJIT SINGH, JM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 30 . 0 3 .201 8 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), 50 MUMBAI [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)]. RELEVANT TO THE A.Y.2011 - 1 2 . 2 . WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMEN TS ADVANCED BY THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED 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 WITHDRAW THE APPEAL. IN RESPONSE TO THE SUGGESTION FROM THE BENCH, HE ASSESSEE BY : SHRI KUNAL PANDEY (AR) REVENUE BY: SHRI SANJAY SETHI (DR) ITA NO. 3576 /M/20 1 8 A.Y.20 11 - 1 2 2 FAIRLY ACCEPTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE APPEAL BEING DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN AS LONG AS HIS RIGHT FOR REVIVAL OF TH E APPEAL IS PROTECTED, IN THE EVENT OF, FOR SOME UNFORTUNATE REASON, THE MATTER BEING NOT SETTLED UNDER THE VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME. 3 . THE LD. DR HAS NO OBJECTIO N TO THE ABOVE. 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 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL AS WITHDRAWN, SUBJECT TO BE RIDER THAT IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT OF MATTER NOT BEING RESOLVED UNDER THE VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME , THE ASSESSEE SHALL HAVE LIBERTY TO APPROACH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 RESTORA TION OF HIS APPEAL. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN SUBJECT TO THE OBSERVATION ABOVE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02 / 0 2 /202 1 SD/ - SD/ - ( M. BALAGANESH ) (AMARJIT SINGH) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 02 / 0 2 / 202 1 V IJAY PAL SINGH /SR.PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / /(DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI