Income Tax Officer- 1(4), Kanpur V. Smt. Sandhya Agarwal, Kanpur

ITA 39/LKW/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7903 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-11-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 09-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW [Through Virtual Hearing] BEFORE SHRI A.D JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 39/Lkw/2020 Assessment Year 2015-16 Sandhya Agarwal, 510-511, City Centre, 63/2, The Mall, Kanpur [PAN: ACZPA 6212H] Income Tax Officer-1(4), Kanpur (Respondent) (Appellant) Ajay Kumar, Sr. DR Appellant by None (Application for Withdrawal) Respondent by 23/11/2021 Date of hearing 23/11/2021 Date of pronouncement O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A.M. : This is an Appeal by the Revenue agitating the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kanpur (‘CIT(A)’ for short) dated 29.11.2018, allowing the assessee’s appeal contesting her assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) for assessment year (AY) 2015- 16 vide order dated 29.12.2017. 2. None appeared for and on behalf of the assessee-respondent when her appeal was called out for hearing. The assesse has, however, vide her application dated 09.11.2021, clarified that she has opted for the settlement of her said tax dispute with the Department under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DTVsV 2 Act) and, consequently, seeks to withdraw her instant appeal. Certificate in Form-5, dated 09.12.2020, issued by the designated authority under the said Act on the conclusion of the proceedings there-under, signifying the settlement of the tax dispute under reference, is also enclosed along with. 3. In view of the foregoing, it is apparent that the assessee’s captioned appeal does not survive for adjudication by the Tribunal; the DTVsV Act itself providing for a vacation of the appeal before the appellate forum. We accordingly have no hesitation in, acceding to the assessee-respondents’ request, to which the ld. Sr. DR also did not raise any objection, permit the withdrawal of the said appeal. We are conscious that the Revenue’s appeal is barred by time, which would need to be condoned, for which a condonation petition dated 30/12/2019 stands furnished along with the memo of appeal, before it’s appeal could be decided by the Tribunal on merits. The same, however, as explained by the Apex Court in Mela Ram & Sons v. CIT [1956] 29 ITR 607 (SC), is integral to and forms part of the adjudication of an appeal, which therefore is to be regarded as admitted and liable to be decided by the Tribunal. The Revenues’s appeal, therefore, is dismissed as withdrawn/not maintainable. We decide accordingly. 4. In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed as not maintainable/ withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 23/11/2021 Sd/- Sd/- (A.D. Jain) (Sanjay Arora) Vice President Accountant Member Date: 23/11/2021 Aks – Copy of order forwarded to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Pr. CIT/CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard FileBy order By Order Assistant Registrar // True Copy//