Sme Growth Fund v. Income Tax Officer - 15 (1) (3), Mumbai & Anr

Amberkar IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO.O.C.J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2565 OF 2018 SME Growth Fund .. Appellant Versus Income Tax Officer - 15 (1) (3), Mumbai & Anr... Respondents ................... Mr. Sameer Dalal for the Appellant. Mr. Sham Walve for the Respondents. ................... CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : MARCH 09, 2021. P.C.: Heard Mr. Sameer Dalal, learned counsel for the appellant andMr. Sham Walve, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961has been preferred by the assessee as the appellant against the orderdated 08.02.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'I'Bench, Mumbai in I.T.A. No.2638/Mum/2013 for the assessment year2008-09. 3. The appeal is pending for admission. 4. Today the appeal is before us on a praecipe filed by learnedcounsel for the appellant. 5. It is submitted that Parliament has enacted the Direct Tax Vivadse Vishwas Act, 2020 (briefly 'the Act' hereinafter) providing for a scheme for resolution of tax disputes. Appellant has filed a declarationunder section 3 of the said Act before the Designated Authority whichhas thereafter issued a certificate under section 5(1) of the said Act on04.02.2021 determining the amount of tax payable by the appellant.However, for passing of the final order under section 5(2) of the saidAct, appellant is required to withdraw the appeal in terms of section4(3) thereof. Hence, the prayer for withdrawal of the appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection to theprayer made for withdrawal of the appeal. 7. Considering the above, we allow the appellant to withdraw theappeal. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of as withdrawn. 8. Refund as per Rules. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] [ UJJAL BHUYAN, J. ] Digitally signedRavindraby Ravindra M.M.AmberkarDate:Amberkar2021.03.0916:32:23 +0530