Minaxi K Mehta v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Mumbai, Bench “D” & Ors

(16)-WP-286-21.doc. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.286 OF 2021 Minaxi K Mehta Versus Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Mumbai, Bench “D” & Ors. ..Petitioner ..Respondents Mr. Shashi Bekal, Advocate for the Petitioner.Mr. Sham Walve, Advocate for the Respondents. CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : 12[th] MARCH, 2021 P.C. Heard Mr. Shashi Bekal, learned counsel for the petitioner andMr. Sham Walve, learned standing counsel revenue for the respondents. 2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiachallenging the legality and validity of order dated 30.01.2020 passed byrespondent No.1 i.e. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "D" Bench, Mumbaifor the assessment year 2008-09. 3. This writ petition is listed today on being mentioned bylearned counsel for the petitioner. 4. It is submitted that Legislature has enacted the Direct TaxVivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 providing for a scheme for resolution of taxdisputes. In terms thereof, petitioner has filed declaration under section 3 BGP. 1 of 2 Digitallysigned byBalajiG.Balaji G.PanchalDate:Panchal2021.03.1511:00:31+0530 (16)-WP-286-21.doc. before the designated authority. Designated authority has issued certificateunder section 5(1) on 15.02.2021 determining the amount payable. Forpassing of the final order under section 5(2), petitioner is required towithdraw the petition under section 4(3) and to furnish proof ofwithdrawal along with intimation of payment, if any, to the designatedauthority. Hence, prayer for withdrawal of the writ petition. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection to theprayer made. 7. Having regard to the above, we allow withdrawal of the writpetition. 8. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn. 9. Refund as per rules. MILIND N. JADHAV, J UJJAL BHUYAN, J BGP. 2 of 2