https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790064 The Tribunal's refusal to entertain a miscellaneous application under Section 254(2) and restore an appeal treated as withdrawn under the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme was held unsustainable. Where the assessee had opted for settlement, made substantial payment, and later sought restoration so the tax dispute could be decided on merits while preserving the settlement remedy, the Tribunal ought to have revived the appeal instead of declining to do so. The result was in favour of the assessee, with restoration directed for adjudication on merits. en-us Wed, 25 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Apr 2026 08:22:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790064 The Tribunal's refusal to entertain a miscellaneous application under Section 254(2) and restore an appeal treated as withdrawn under the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme was held unsustainable. Where the assessee had opted for settlement, made substantial payment, and later sought restoration so the tax dispute could be decided on merits while preserving the settlement remedy, the Tribunal ought to have revived the appeal instead of declining to do so. The result was in favour of the assessee, with restoration directed for adjudication on merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 25 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790064