Minal v. Digitally Signedby Minal V.parab Parab Date: 2021.01.2811:41:19 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.287 OF 2015 Zaiuddin A. Siddique…Vs.Joint Commissioner of Income Tax 19(3), Mumbai … …AppellantRespondent Mr. Sameer Dalal for the Appellant.Mr. Arvind Pinto for the Respondent. CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN &MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ.DATE :JANUARY 27, 2021 P.C.: Heard Mr. Sameer Dalal, learned counsel for the appellant andMr. Arvind Pinto, learned standing counsel revenue for the respondent. 2.This appeal under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 hasbeen preferred by the assessee against the order dated 25.04.2014 passedby the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'G' Bench, Mumbai in I.T.A.No.4700/M/2011 for the assessment year 2005-06. 3.The appeal was admitted by this Court on 31.10.2017 on thesubstantial questions of law framed in the said order. 4.Today the appeal is before us on praecipe filed by learned counselfor the appellant. 5.It is submitted that Parliament has enacted the Direct Tax Vivad seVishwas Act, 2020 (briefly ‘the Act’ hereinafter) providing for a schemefor resolution of tax disputes. In terms of the said scheme, appellant hasfiled a declaration under section 3 thereof before the DesignatedAuthority which has thereafter issued a certificate under section 5(1) ofthe said Act determining the amount payable by the appellant. However, for passing 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 the prayermade for withdrawal of the appeal. 7.Considering the above, we allow the appellant to withdraw theappeal.appeal. 8.Appeal is accordingly disposed of on withdrawal. 9.Refund as per Rules. (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) (UJJAL BHUYAN, J.) Minal Parab