Span Associates v. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax-19(1)-1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 733 OF 2016 Span Associates..Appellant Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax-19(1)-1..Respondent ................... Mr. Mandar Vaidya for the Appellant. Mr. Sham Walve for the Respondent. ................... CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 03, 2021. P.C.: Heard Mr. Mandar Vaidya, learned counsel for the appellant andMr. Sham Walve, learned standing counsel, revenue for therespondent. 2. This appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 hasbeen preferred by the assessee as the appellant against the order dated24.09.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MumbaiBench "H", Mumbai in ITA No. 678/Mum/2011 for the assessmentyear 2007-08. 3.The appeal was admitted by this Court on 03.12.2018 on thesubstantial question of law framed in the said order. 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 ascheme for resolution of tax disputes. Appellant has filed a declarationunder section 3 of the said Act before the Designated Authority whichhad thereafter issued a certificate under section 5(1) of the said Actdetermining the amount refundable to the appellant. However, forpassing 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 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 Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of as withdrawn. 8.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. ]