Itxa/2574/2011 Of M/S. Asphalt India Corporation v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax City 25 Mumbai

Priya Soparkar 1 24 itxa 2574-11-os IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2574 OF 2011 M/s Asphalt India Corporation, Mumbai.V/s.Commissioner of Income Tax, City – 25, Mumbai.--- Ms.Aasifa Khan, Advocate for the Appellant.Mr.Suresh Kumar, Advocate for the Respondent. --- … Appellant … Respondent CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN &MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 15, 2021. P.C.:- Heard Ms.Aasifa Khan, learned counsel for the appellant; andMr.Suresh Kumar, learned standing counsel, revenue for therespondent. 2. This appeal has been preferred under section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 30[th] June, 2011passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "A" Bench, Mumbaiin ITA No.2707/Mum/2009 for the assessment year 2005-06. 3.By order dated 12[th] March, 2013 the appeal was admitted bythis court on the substantial questions of law framed therein. 4.Learned counsel for the appellant submits that during thependency of the appeal Parliament has enacted the Direct TaxVivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 providing for a scheme forresolution of tax disputes. Appellant had filed a declaration undersection 3 of the said Act before the Designated Authority whichAuthority has issued certificate under section 5(1) on 3[rd]February, 2021 determining the amount of tax payable by the Priya Soparkar 2 24 itxa 2574-11-os appellant which is “Nil”. For passing of final order under section5(2) of the said Act, appellant is required to withdraw the appealunder section 4(3). Hence, the prayer for withdrawal. 5.Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection to theprayer made. 6.In view thereof, we allow the prayer for withdrawal.Consequently, the appeal is disposed of on withdrawal. 7.Refund of court fee as per rules. (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) …. (UJJAL BHUYAN, J.)