Bhartiben A. Shah v. Commissioner Of Income Tax - City

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO.O.C.J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1021 OF 2014 Bhartiben A. Shah .. Appellant Versus Commissioner of Income Tax - City - 16, MatruMandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400 007. .. Respondent ................... Ms. Rutuja N. Pawar for the Appellant. Mr. Sham Walve for the Respondent. ................... CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 25, 2021. P.C.: Heard Ms. Pawar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.Walve, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961has been preferred by the assessee as the appellant against the orderdated 12.03.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B'Bench, Mumbai in I.T.A. No.5771/Mum/2011 for the assessment year1998-99. 3. The appeal was admitted by this Court on 25.10.2016 on thesubstantial questions of law framed in the said order. 4. Today the appeal is before us on a praecipe filed by learnedcounsel for the appellant. 5. It is submitted that Parliament has enacted the Direct Tax Vivadse Vishwas Act, 2020 (briefly 'the Act' hereinafter) providing for ascheme for resolution of tax disputes. Appellant has filed a declarationunder section 3 of the said Act before the Designated Authority whichhas thereafter issued a certificate under section 5(1) of the said Actdetermining the amount of tax payable by the appellant. However, forpassing of the final order under section 5(2) of the said Act, appellantis required to withdraw the appeal in terms of section 4(3) thereof.Hence, the prayer for withdrawal of the appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection to theprayer made for withdrawal of the appeal. 7. Considering the above, we allow the appellant to withdraw theappeal. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of as withdrawn. 8. Refund as per Rules. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] [ UJJAL BHUYAN, J. ] Digitally signedRavindraby Ravindra M.M.AmberkarDate:Amberkar2021.02.2514:34:37 +0530