SH. ANKIT SOMANI,JAIPUR V. ITO, WARD-6(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 986/JPR/2024

AI Insights

Ankit Somani, the appellant, challenged an assessment order from the Income Tax Department which added a total income of Rs. 15,15,027 to his account under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, alleging that he had invested in a paper company to earn bogus long-term capital gains. The CIT(A) upheld this assessment, leading Somani to appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur. However, before the tribunal could hear the appeal, Somani decided to withdraw it, opting for a settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. The tribunal, acknowledging the procedural requirement of withdrawal for the scheme's benefit, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 27116 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 06-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 19-07-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM SINGH CHOUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: P.C. PARWAL
• Keywords: Bogus
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

" ITA No.986/JP/2024 Ankit Somani v. ITO, Ward-6(3), Jaipur vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 986/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ankit Somani D-2, Tonk Road Nulite Colony, Jaipur-302001, Rajasthan, India cuke v. ITO, Ward-6(3), Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: BBJPS0330Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. P.C.Parwal, C.A. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary (JCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 2/12/2024 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 2/12/2024 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: Narinder Kumar, Judicial Member By way of present appeal, the assessee-appellant challenged the order dated 31/05/2024, passed by learned CIT(A), as regards the assessment order dated 26.09.2021 relating to Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Vide assessment order dated 26.09.2021, the Assessing Officer assessed total income of the assessee-appellant at Rs. 15,15,027/-, by making an addition u/s 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), as the assessee was found to have made investment in a company, which existed only on papers, in order to earn bogus Long Term Capital Gain. (1) ITA No.986/JP/2024 Ankit Somani v. ITO, Ward-6(3), Jaipur 3. Feelings aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee challenged the same by way of an appeal beforer learned CIT(A). Vide impugned order, Learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by upholding the assessment order, while observing that the Assessing Officer had thoroughly analysed report of the Investigation Wing and the documents collected during investigation carried out by the said Wing, to prove that the appellant introduced bogus long term capital gain in his books of account by routing his unaccounted income through a tax evasion scheme, and further that the assessee failed to produce cogent evidence on this aspect. 4. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned order, the assessee is before this Appellate Tribunal. 5. When the appeal is pending for hearing, an application has been filed on behalf of the appellant, through Learned AR-Shri P.C. Parwal, CA, expressing therein that the assessee wants to withdraw the appeal as he has opted to settle the dispute by availing of benefit of Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. Application came to be presented before the Registry on 05.11.2024. It is accompanied by photocopy of Form No.2 stated to have been issued by Principal Comissioner of Income Tax-2, Jaipur. Form No.2 is actually certificate dated 29.10.2024, u/s 92(1) of the said scheme . 6. Learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the given situation, applicant may be permitted to withdraw this appeal. 7. Learned DR has no objection to the allowing of the prayer of the appellant for withdrawal of the appeal. (2) ITA No.986/JP/2024 Ankit Somani v. ITO, Ward-6(3), Jaipur 8. In view of the above submissions put forth, since withdrawal of the appeal is stated to be one of the essential requirements to avail of the benefit of said Scheme of 2024, in the interest of justice, this appeal is hereby dismissed as having been withdrawn. File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 2 /12/2024. Sd/- Sd/- ¼jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 2 /12/2024 vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant-Sh. Ankit Somani. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward-6(3), Jaipur. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT. 4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@CIT(A) 5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 986/JP/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar (3) ITA No.986/JP/2024 Ankit Somani v. ITO, Ward-6(3), Jaipur (3) "