A. C. Exports v. Income Tax Officer

Balaji G.Panchal Digitally signed byBalaji G. PanchalDate: 2021.02.0510:32:35 +0530 (6)-ITXA-420-09.doc. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.420 OF 2009 A. C. Exports ..Appellant Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-18(1)(3), Mumbai & Anr. ..Respondents Ms. Neha Paranjape i/by Jitendra Singh, Advocate for the Appellant.Mr. Sham Walve, Advocate for the Respondents. CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : 4[th] FEBRUARY, 2021 P.C. 1. Heard Ms. Neha Paranjape, learned counsel for the appellantand Mr. Sham Walve, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee as the appellantunder section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated29.04.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” Bench,Mumbai in ITA No.3722/Mum/2004 for the assessment year 1995-96. 3. The appeal was admitted by this Court by order dated22.04.2009 on the substantial question of law framed in the said order. 4. Today the appeal is before us on a praecipe filed by learnedcounsel for the appellant. 1 of 2 (6)-ITXA-420-09.doc. 5. It is stated that Parliament has enacted the Direct Tax Vivad seVishwas Act, 2020 providing for a scheme for resolution of tax disputes. Interms thereof, appellant has filed declaration under section 3 on 14.12.2020before the designated authority. Designated authority issued certificateunder section 5(1) on 28.01.2021 determining the amount payable. Forpassing of the final order under section 5(2), appellant is required towithdraw the appeal under section 4(3) and to furnish proof of withdrawalalong 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 theprayer 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 Appeal is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn. 9.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 2 of 2