ANIL RAJARAM BUCHDE,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR-2, PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 864/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 August 2023AY 2014-156 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had not properly adjudicated the assessee's rectification plea and had not established a clear nexus between the Vivad se Vishwas settlement and the rectification sought. The appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee sought rectification of an assessment order to reduce short-term capital gains. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, holding it redundant as the assessee had opted for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, which settled the assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the rectification appeal as redundant without proper adjudication, especially when the Vivad se Vishwas settlement might not have covered the specific rectification sought.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A” : PUNE

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI GD PADMAHSHALI

Hearing: 25.08.2023Pronounced: 29.08.2023

ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014- 2015, arises against the CIT(A), Pune-11, Pune’s Din and Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1053353290(1), dated 31.05.2023, involving proceedings u/s.154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

The assessee pleads the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal :

2 I.T.A.No.864/PUN./2023 1. “On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions and scheme of the Act it be held that the Hon’ble Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals) erred in holding that the appeal filed by the Appellant against order u/s. 154 of the Act is redundant. The Appellant be granted just and proper relief in this respect. [Rs.81,58,270/-] 2. Without prejudice to Ground no. 1 and on facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions and scheme of the Act it be held that the Hon’ble Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the decision of the Learned Assessing Officer in rejecting the rectification application filed by the Appellant. It be held that that the amount of Short Term Capital Gains offered to tax during the AY 2014-15 in its return of income deserves to be reduced by Rs.2,87,15,000/-. The Appellant be granted just and proper relief in this respect. [Rs.81,58,270/-].

3.

The Appellant prays to be allowed to add, amend, modify, rectify, delete, raise any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.”

3. Suffice to say, it emerges during the course of hearing that the CIT(A)'s detailed discussion in question has rejected the assessee’s lower appeal in sec.154 rectification proceedings as under :

3 I.T.A.No.864/PUN./2023 “6. I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions made by the appellant. Briefly stated, the grievance of the appellant is that an amount of Rs.2,87,15,000/- has been inadvertently offered in the return of income filed for A.Y. 2014-15 and same is required to be reduced from the income assessed. In this connection, it is seen from the records available in this office that the appellant had filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against the assessment order dated 31/12/2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act for A.Y. 2014-15. During the pendency of appeal, the appellant preferred to file application under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and the said application was approved by the competent authority. Form-3 under VSV Scheme, for A.Y. 2014-15 was issued on 28/12/2020 and Form-5 was issued on 26/10/2021 by acknowledging the due payment of tax amount specified in Form-3. In this manner, the assessment for A.Y. 2014-15 has attained finality at an income of Rs.4,81,12,170/-, which was assessed vide order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 31/12/2016. The request of the appellant vide rectification application is, to reduce the said assessed income of Rs.4,81,12,170/-. Since the income assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act has attained finality under VSV Scheme, therefore, the present appeal u/s 154 of the Act has become redundant and 4 I.T.A.No.864/PUN./2023 cannot be adjudicated upon by the undersigned. Accordingly, the present appeal of the appellant is DISMISSED being redundant.

7.

To conclude, the present appeal of the appellant for A.Y. 2014-15 is DISMISSED for statistical purposes.”

4.

Mr. Khandelwal vehemently submitted during the course of hearing that the CIT(A) has simply brushed aside the assessee’s rectification pleadings thereby holding that he had already taken recourse to the settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020 instead having adjudicated the corresponding issues on merits. He next submitted that the assessee’s limited prayer at this stage seeks directions to the CIT(A) for appropriate adjudication of the matter u.sec.250(6) of the Act which has nowhere been done in the impugned former round.

5.

Mr. Murkunde could hardly dispute that the CIT(A)'s foregoing detailed discussion has nowhere established the clear cut nexus between the assessee’s alleged settlement petition dealing with the very issue under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020 vis-à-vis relief claimed u/sec.154 rectification before us. We wish to clarify that the assessee’s stand before us is that he had sought to rectify the relevant apparent mistakes in the computation which nowhere formed part of the settlement under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020’s

5 I.T.A.No.864/PUN./2023 settlement. Faced with the situation and without going into the merits of the issue, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to learned CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication as per law, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly.

6.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 29.08.2023.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →