BHOLORAM MALVIYA , MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER W-16(1) (1) , MUMBAI

ITA 5964/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8478 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 18-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: THARIAN OOMMEN
• Section: 271(1)(c); 13

Judgement Text

ITA NO.5964/MUM/2019 A.Y. 2012 - 13 BHOLARAM MALVIYA VS. ITO, WARD 16(1)(1) 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH B MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH ( ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ) AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA NO. 5964 /MUM/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012 - 13 ) BHOLARAM MALVIYA 605, EMBASSY, SHASTRI NAGAR, ROAD NO. 1, LOKHANDWALA, ANDHERI (W), MUMBAI 400053 VS. ITO, WARD 16(1)(1) ROOM NO. 436A, 4 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020 PAN NO. AAMPM7312D (ASSESSEE) (REVENUE) ASSESSEE BY : MS. TEJAL SARAF , A.R REVENUE BY : SHRI THARIAN OOMMEN , SR. D.R DATE OF HEARING : 2 4 /03/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24 /03/2021 ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M: THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) - 4, MUMBAI, DATED 26.08.2019, WHICH IN TURN ARISES FROM THE PENALTY ORDER PASSED BY THE A.O U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT ACT), DATED 30.03.2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 13 . 2. THE ASSESSEE S COUNSEL VIDE A LETTER E - FILED ON 23 RD MARCH, 2021 HAD STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 1 & 2 UNDER THE DIRECT TAX VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT, 2020 IN ORDER TO SETTLE THE AFORESAID MATTER PENDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL . IT IS FURTHER STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED A CERTIFICATE IN FORM NO. 3 FROM THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY UNDER SUB - SECTION (1) OF SEC.5 OF THE DIRECT TAX VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT, 2020. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE PERMITTED TO WITHDRAW THE CAPTIONED APPEAL. 3. THE LD. D.R DID NOT CONTROVERT THE AFORESAID FACTUAL POSITION AS WAS CANVASSED BEFORE US. ITA NO.5964/MUM/2019 A.Y. 2012 - 13 BHOLARAM MALVIYA VS. ITO, WARD 16(1)(1) 2 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL AS WITHDRAWN, SUBJECT TO A RIDER THAT IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT OF THE MATTER NOT BEING RESOLVED UNDER THE VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME THE ASSESSEE SHALL HAVE LIBERTY TO APPROACH THE TRIBUNAL FOR RESTORATION OF ITS APPEAL. 5. R ESULTANTLY, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN SUBJECT TO THE OBSERVATION RECORDED HEREINABOVE. ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 4 /03/2021. SD/ - SD/ - ( M. BALAGANESH ) (RAVISH SOOD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED: 24 .03.2021 PS: ROHIT 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// (SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY) ITAT, MUMBAI