GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CORPORATION, MUMBAI V. DDIT (IT) RG 3(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7032/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5496 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 year(s) 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-01-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: K
• Next Hearing Date: 16-09-2013
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 11-10-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: AMEYA PANT

Judgement Text

ITA NO S . 7031 & 7032 /MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2003 - 04 PAGE 1 OF 2 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI I BENCH, MUMBAI [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR (VICE PRESIDENT) AND SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER)] ITA NO S . 7031 & 7032 /MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2003 - 04 & 2004 - 05 GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CORPORATION .APPELLANT C/O. KPMG LODHA EXCELUS, 1 ST FLOOR, APOLLO MILLS COMPOUND, NM JOSHI MARG, MAHALAXMI, MUMBAI 400011 [PAN: AACCG0933H] VS DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 3(1), MUMBAI. ..........RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY AMEYA PANT FOR THE APPELLANT SANJAY SINGH FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDIN G THE HEARING : JANUARY 13, 2021 DATE OF PRON OUNCEMENT : JANUARY 1 4 , 2021 ORDER PER BENCH: - 1. THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, CALLS INTO QUESTION THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 20 TH JULY 2010, PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) - 10, MUMBAI IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT U/S.271 BA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003 - 04. ITA NO S . 7031 & 7032 /MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2003 - 04 PAGE 2 OF 2 2. WHEN THESE APPEAL S WERE 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 NEC ESSARY FORMALITIES, HE WILL WITHDRAW THE APPEAL S . IN RESPONSE TO THE SUGGESTION FROM THE BENCH, HE FAIRLY ACCEPTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE APPEAL BEING DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN AS LONG AS HIS RIGHT FOR REVIVAL OF THE APPEAL ARE PROTECTED, IN THE EVEN T OF, FOR SOME UNFORESEEN REASON, THE MATTER BEING NOT SETTLED UNDER THE VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME. 3. THE LD. DR ALSO DID NOT OBJECT TO COURSE SO SUGGESTED. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DISMISS THE SE APPEALS AS WITHDRAWN, SUBJECT TO BE RIDER THAT IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT OF MATTER NOT BEING RESOLVED UNDER THE VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME, THE ASSESSEE SHALL HAVE LIBERTY TO APPROACH THE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 RESTORATION OF HIS APPEAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE SE APPEAL S ARE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN SUBJECT TO THE OBSERVATION ABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 1 4 JANUARY, 2021. S D / - S D / - SAKTIJIT DEY PRAMOD K UMAR ( JUDICIAL MEMBER ) (VICE PRESIDENT) MUMBAI, DATED THE 1 4 DAY OF JANUARY, 2021 N.V, SR. PS COPIES TO: (1) THE APPLICANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI