Court :
ITAT Mumbai
Brief :
These appeals by two assessees belonging to the same group are directed against respective orders of learned CIT(A)-26, Mumbai [in short ‘the CIT(A)] dated for Assessment Year 2009-10.
Citation :
ITA No. 1255/MUM/2015
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER &
SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 1255/MUM/2015
Assessment Year : 2009-10
Mahendra Jivraj Jain HUF,
29, Manipar House, 1st Floor,
Parsi Wada Lane,
Mumbai 400 004.
PAN : AADHJ7669H
(Appellant)
Vs.
Income Tax Officer – 15(1)(1),
Mumbai.
(Respondent)
ITA No. 363/MUM/2015
Assessment Year : 2009-10
Jeevraj U Jain HUF,
Flat No.27, Khemraj Bhavan,
7th Khetwadi Lane,
Khetwadi Back Road,
Mumbai 400 004.
PAN : AADHJ8990B
(Appellant)
Vs
Income Tax Officer – 15(1)(1),
Mumbai.
(Respondent)
Appellant by : Shri Sanjiv M Shah
Revenue by : Dr Sunil Deshpande
Date of Hearing :1.12.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 04.12.2020
O R D E R
These appeals by two assessees belonging to the same group are directed against respective orders of learned CIT(A)-26, Mumbai [in short ‘the CIT(A)] dated for Assessment Year 2009-10.
2. The grounds of appeal relate to addition on account of bogus capital gain.
3. At the outset, it is noted that by a written submission it is stated that assessees have opted for solution of dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. He further states that Form 1 and 2 have already filed and a copies of the same are produced before us.
4. We note that in a similar situation, Hon'ble Madras High Court has in an appeal in the case of M/s. Nannusamy Mohan (HUF) vs ACIT vide order dated 16.10.2020 held as under :-
“3. The learned counsel for the appellant / assessee, on instructions, submitted that the appellant / assessee intends to avail the benefit of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (‘VVS Scheme’ for brevity) and in this regard, the assessee is taking steps to file the application / declaration in Form No. I.
To know more in details find the attachment file