Federal Express (India) Private Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income-Tax-X, Mumbai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 2259 OF 2013 Federal Express (India) Private Ltd. VersusCommissioner of Income-Tax-X, Mumbai ................... Mr. Atul K. Jasani for the Appellant. Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Respondent. ................... .. Appellant .. Respondent CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 03, 2021. P.C.: Heard Mr. Atul Jasani, learned counsel for the appellant andMr. Suresh Kumar, learned standing counsel, revenue for therespondent. 2. This appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been preferred by the assessee as the appellant against the order dated20.03.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "F" Bench,Mumbai in ITA No. 1475/Mum/2012 for the assessment year 2008-09. 3.The appeal was admitted by this Court on 22.12.2015 on thesubstantial question of law framed in the said order. 4. 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 whichhad thereafter issued a certificate under section 5(1) of the said Actdetermining the amount refundable to 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. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection to theprayer made for withdrawal of the appeal. 6. Considering the above, we allow the appellant to withdraw theappeal. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of as withdrawn. 7. Refund as per Rules. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] [ UJJAL BHUYAN, J. ] Digitallysigned byRavindraRavindra M.AmberkarM.Date:Amberkar2021.02.0418:08:53+0530