UMESH BASAVARAJ MAHABALSHETTI,BIJAPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 & TPS, BIJAPUR , BIJAPUR

ITA 2393/BANG/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Shri Umesh Basavaraj Mahabalshetti against the order of the NFAC, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2011-12. The appeal was initially filed with the ITAT, Panaji Bench, but was later dismissed due to jurisdictional issues, leading to a delay of 133 days in re-filing with the correct tribunal. The assessee opted to settle the dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024, and subsequently filed a request to withdraw the appeal, which was granted by the tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712824 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHWIN D GOWDA
• Assessee Lawyers: AARYAK

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2393/Bang/2024 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Umesh Basavaraj Mahabalshetti, Maitri Galli, Jamakhandi, Tal: Jamakhandi, Dist: Bagalkot Karnataka – 587 301. PAN: ABAPM2242B Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1 & TPS, Bijapur. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Aaryak, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Ashwin D Gowda, Addl. CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 29-07-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 31-07-2025 ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 14/05/2024 in respect of the A.Y. 2011-12 with a delay of 133 days. 2. In support of the said delay, the assessee filed an application in which the assessee had explained the reasons for the said delay. In the application, the assessee submitted that originally, the appeal was filed before the ITAT, Panaji Bench in time. Later on, the assessee was informed Printed from counselvise.com Page 2 of 3 ITA No. 2393/Bang/2024 that this Tribunal alone having jurisdiction to try the said appeal. This fact was brought to the knowledge of the ITAT Panaji Bench and therefore the Panaji Bench of this Tribunal dismissed the appeal vide order dated 12/11/2024 in ITA No. 143/PAN/2024. Thereafter the assessee preferred this appeal before this Tribunal and therefore the said delay of 133 days has been occurred and prayed to condone the said delay. 3. We have considered the said submissions made by the assessee and also the reasons for the said delay and we are satisfied that the assessee is having sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal in time before this Tribunal. We, therefore condone the said delay and proceeded to decide the appeal on merits. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee had opted to settle the issue under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 and also filed an application in form 1 of the said scheme and also filed a letter dated 10/02/2025 seeking the permission of this Tribunal to withdraw the said appeal. The Ld.AR at the time of hearing also informed that form 5 under the said scheme was also issued in the name of the assessee and therefore prayed that the matter may be treated as withdrawn and dismissed. 5. The Ld.DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 6. We have considered the letter dated 10/02/2025 and recorded the said letter in which it was informed that the assessee had opted to settle the issue under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. Today, the assessee also submitted that form 5 was also issued by the authorities and therefore nothing is required to be adjudicated in this appeal. 7. Recording the above said submissions and the letter given by the assessee, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn with the liberty to approach Printed from counselvise.com Page 3 of 3 ITA No. 2393/Bang/2024 this Tribunal if any adverse order has been passed by the authorities under the said scheme in future. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open court on 31st July, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (SOUNDARARAJAN K.) Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated, the 31st July, 2025. /MS / Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Bangalore 5. Guard file 6. CIT(A) By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore Printed from counselvise.com "