Anurag Jhawar, Faridabad V. ITO WARD - 1(1), Faridabad

ITA 537/DEL/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9961 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.537/Del/2020 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15) Anurag Jhawar, 191, MIG-B, Housing Board Colony, Sector-10, Faridabad. PAN- AENPJ1203R Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Faridabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent by Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM: (A) This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Faridabad [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 27.11.2019 for Assessment Year 2014-15. Grounds taken in this appeal of Assessee are as under: “The Learned CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs 80,05,089/- holding the Long Term Capital Gain ingenuine and further erred in ignoring the fact that the addition made by Ld. Assessing Officer was without his independent finding. ITA No.537/Del/2020 Anurag Jhawar vs. ITO Page 2 of 4 2. The Learned CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition made by Ld. Assessing Officer of Rs 80,05,089/- contrary to facts and circumstances of the case and the applicable law; 3. The assessee craves leave to add, delete, amend and modify any grounds of the appeal before and/or at the time of hearing of the appeal. Additional Ground:- 4. The addition of Rs. 80,05,089/- confirmed is erroneous because reasons recorded U/s 148(2) were invalid in as much as they apparently does not reveal the examination of the material by the Ld. Assessing Officer and his independent view forming the belief that purported income escaped assessment.” (B) The assessee, vide letter dated 06.07.2022, submitted that the assessee has opted for Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 (“VSVS”, for short) and that the Designated Authority has already issued Form-5 under VSVS. A copy of Form-5 issued by the Designated Authority was also enclosed with the aforesaid letter; and the assessee applied for withdrawal of appeal. The ld. Senior Departmental Representative for Revenue submitted before us, at the time of hearing, that the appeal has become infructuous in view of the assessee opting for VSVS; and that the appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn. After due consideration and in view of the ITA No.537/Del/2020 Anurag Jhawar vs. ITO Page 3 of 4 foregoing, we are of the opinion that this appeal has become infructuous on account of aforesaid VSVS, and that this appeal may be treated as withdrawn on account of the aforesaid VSVS. Accordingly, this appeal having become infructuous, is treated as withdrawn and is hereby dismissed. (B.1) Before we part, we hereby clarify, by way of abundant caution, that if for some reason the disputes under this appeal before us are not settled under the aforesaid VSVS, then the assessee will be at liberty to approach ITAT for restoration of this appeal in accordance with law. (C) In the result, this appeal is dismissed. This order was already pronounced orally on 6 th July, 2022 in Open Court. Now this order in writing is signed today on 07.07.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 07.07.2022 Prabhat ITA No.537/Del/2020 Anurag Jhawar vs. ITO Page 4 of 4 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW, DELHI