Kalpana D. Vora v. Income Tax Officer 16(1)(4), Mumbai & Anr

R.M. AMBERKAR(Private Secretary) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO.O.C.J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1168 OF 2018 Kalpana D. Vora Versus Income Tax Officer 16(1)(4), Mumbai & Anr. ..Appellant ..Respondents ................... Mr. Jitendra Singh for the Appellant Mr. Jitendra Singh for the Appellant Mr. Sham Walve for the RespondentsMr. Sham Walve for the Respondents ................... CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 1, 2021. P.C.: Heard Mr. Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for theappellant and Mr. Sham Walve, learned standing counselRevenue for the respondents. 2. This appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961 has been preferred by the assessee as the appellantagainst the order dated 22.08.2017 passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, "SMC" Bench, Mumbai in I.T.A. No. 2219/Mum/2017 for the assessment year 2008-09 3.The appeal is pending for admission. 4.Today the appeal is before us on a praecipe filed bylearned counsel for the appellant. 5.It is submitted that Parliament has enacted the DirectTax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (briefly 'the Act' hereinafter)providing for a scheme for resolution of tax disputes.Appellant has filed a declaration under section 3 of the saidAct before the Designated Authority which had thereafterissued a certificate under section 5(1) of the said Act on06.01.2021. However, for passing of the final order undersection 5(2) of the said Act, appellant is required to withdrawthe appeal in terms of section 4(3) thereof. Hence, theprayer for withdrawal of the appeal. 6.Learned counsel for the respondents has no objectionto the prayer made for withdrawal of the appeal. 7.Considering the above, we allow the appellant towithdraw the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed ofas withdrawn. 8.Refund as per Rules. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] [ UJJAL BHUYAN, J. ] Digitallysigned byRavindraRavindra M.AmberkarM.AmberkarDate:2021.02.0211:23:50+0530