Oricon Enterprises Limited, Parijat House v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,Central Circle - 3(3), Mumbai
High Court
18 Feb 2021 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Oricon Enterprises Limited, Parijat House v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,Central Circle - 3(3), Mumbai
Date of order
18 Feb 2021
Assessment year(s)
2014-15
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Oricon Enterprises Limited, Parijat House v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,Central Circle - 3(3), Mumbai, the High Court (2021) decided the matter.
Decision: 7.Considering the above, we allow the appellant towithdraw the appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO.O.C.J.
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.236 OF 2021
Oricon Enterprises Limited, Parijat House ..Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle - 3(3), Mumbai..Respondent
...................
Mr. Atul Jasani, Advocate for the Appellant.Mr. Atul Jasani, Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr. Suresh Kumar, Advocate for the Respondent.Mr. Suresh Kumar, Advocate for the Respondent.
...................
CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN &
MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ.
DATE : FEBRUARY 18, 2021.
P.C.:
Heard Mr. 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 appellantagainst the order dated 29.10.2019 passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Mumbai in I.T.A. No.3641/Mum/2018 for the assessment year 2014-15.
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 on 30.12.2020 before the Designated Authority whichhad thereafter issued a certificate under section 5(1) of thesaid Act on 29.01.2021 determining the amount refundableto the appellant. However, for passing of the final orderunder section 5(2) of the said Act, appellant is required towithdraw 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 tothe 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. ]
Digitally signedRavindraby Ravindra M.AmberkarM.Date:Amberkar2021.02.1914:43:41+0530
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.