SUBODHCHANDRA GHATALIA, MUMBAI V. ITO 26 (3)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 7015/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7920 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 15-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GURBINDER SINGH
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

ITA NOS.7015 & 7016/MUM/2019 A.YS. 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11 SUBODHCHANDRA GHATALIA VS. ITO - 26(3)(3) 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH H MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA NO S.7015 & 7016 /MUM/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11 ) SUBODHCHANDRA GHATALIA 162/12, GULRATAN MAHAL, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, SION (EAST), MUMBAI 400022 VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 26(3)(3) KAUTILYA BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, MUMBAI - 400051 PAN NO. AAFPG8301B ( ASSESSEE ) ( REVENUE ) ASSESSEE BY : WITHDRAWAL LETTER DATED 30.03.2021 REVENUE BY : SHRI GURBINDER SINGH, D.R DATE OF HEARING : 01/07 /2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01 /07/ 2021 ORDER PER BENCH : THE CAPTIONED APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDER S PASSED BY THE CIT(A) - 38, MUMBAI, DATED 24.06 .2019 , WHICH IN TURN ARISES FROM THE PENALTY ORDER S PASSED BY THE A.O UNDER SEC. 271(1)(C) OF TH E INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961, DATED 27.03.2018 FOR A.Y . 2009 - 10 & A.Y. 2010 - 11. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS E - FILED A LETTER DATED 30 TH MARCH, 2021, WHEREIN IT IS STATED THAT HE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION UNDER THE DIRECT TAX VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT, 2020 IN ORDER TO SETTLE THE AFORESAID MATTER S PENDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND HAS RECEIVED THE CE RTIFICATE S UNDER SUB - SECTION (1) OF SEC. 5 OF DIRECT TAX VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT, 2020 FROM THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY. IN SUPPORT OF HIS AFORESAID CLAIM THE ASSESSEE HAD ENCLOSED COPIES OF FORM 3 ISSUED BY THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY FOR BOTH THE AFOREMENTIONED YEARS . IT IS STATED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID FACTS THE CAPTIONED APPEALS MAY BE ALLOWED TO BE WITHDRAWN. 3. THE LD. D.R DID NOT CONTROVERT THE AFORESAID FACTUAL POSITION AS WAS CANVASSED BEFORE US. ITA NOS.7015 & 7016/MUM/2019 A.YS. 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11 SUBODHCHANDRA GHATALIA VS. ITO - 26(3)(3) 2 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL S AS WITHDRAWN, SUBJECT TO A RIDER THAT IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT OF THE MATTER NOT BEING RESOLVED UNDER THE VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME THE ASSESSEE SHALL HAVE LIBERTY TO APPROACH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 HIS APPEAL S . 5. RESULTANTLY, TH E APPEALS ARE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN SUBJECT TO THE OBSERVATION RECORDED HEREINABOVE. ORDER PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01 /07 /2021. SD/ - SD/ - ( S. RIFAUR RAHMAN ) (RAVISH SOOD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED: 01 .07 .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)