Trapu Investments Pvt.Ltd v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax Range-3(3)

(18)-ITXA-1637-17.doc.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Digitally signed by Balaji G.

Panchal Date:

2021.03.09 11:47:15 +0530 Balaji G.

Panchal INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1637 OF 2017 Trapu Investments Pvt. Ltd.

..Appellant

Versus

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax ..Respondent Mr. Jay N. Bhansali, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. Sham Walve h/f Mr. A. R. Malhotra, Advocate for the Respondent. CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ.

DATE : 8th MARCH, 2021 P.C.

Heard Mr. Jay N. Bhansali, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Sham Walve holding for Mr. A. R. Malhotra, learned counsel for the respondent.

2.

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee as the appellant under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 19.04.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "E" Bench, Mumbai in ITA No.1123/Mum/2012 for the assessment year 2008-09. 3.

The appeal is pending for admission.

4.

Today the appeal is before us on a praecipe filed by learned counsel for the appellant.

BGP.

(18)-ITXA-1637-17.doc.

5.

It is stated that Parliament has enacted the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 providing for a scheme for resolution of tax disputes. In terms thereof, appellant has filed declaration under section 3 before the designated authority. Designated authority has issued certificate under section 5(1). For passing of the final order under section 5(2), appellant is required to withdraw the appeal under section 4(3) and to furnish proof of withdrawal along with intimation of payment, if any, to the designated authority. Hence, prayer for withdrawal of the appeal. 6.

Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection to the prayer made.

7.

Having regard to the above, we allow withdrawal of the appeal. 8.

Appeal is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn. 9.

Refund as per rules.

MILIND N. JADHAV, J UJJAL BHUYAN, J BGP.