SANGEETA AJAY AGGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 13(2), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5873/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 August 2022AY 2013-143 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and had received Form-5. Consequently, the appeal was treated as withdrawn and dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming additions made by the ACIT on account of long-term capital gains and commission payments. The assessee later opted to settle the appeal under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal has become infructuous due to settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The primary grounds of appeal related to the taxability of long-term capital gains and commission payments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(38),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI

ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM: (A) This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, New Delhi [Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 30.05.2019 for Assessment Year 2013-14.

Grounds taken in this appeal are as under:

“1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-V, New Delhi has confirmed the addition made by Ld. ACIT on account of long term capital gain of Rs.1,40,34,693/- on sale of shares sold on recognized stock Sangeeta Ajay Aggarwal Vs. ITO exchange and eligible for exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act and bringing to tax as unexplained cash credit u/s 68.

2.

The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-V, New Delhi has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.1,40,350/- made by Ld. ACIT by presuming that the assessee had paid Commission of Rs.1,40,350/- without any basis and without any sources of such cash generation during the year.” (B) At the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. However, through a written communication vide letter dated 23rd August, 2022, filed in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal from the assessee’s side, it has been intimated that the assessee has opted to settle the aforementioned appeal under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 (“VSVS”, for short) and that the Designated Authority has already issued Form-5 under VSVS. We took notice of the aforesaid letter dated 23.08.2022. Copy of Form-5 issued by Designated Authority under VSVS was also enclosed with the aforesaid letter. Learned Senior Departmental Representative for Revenue submitted before us that this appeal may be treated as withdrawn and may be dismissed on account of the aforesaid VSVS.

After due consideration and in view of the foregoing, we are of the opinion that this appeal has become infructuous on account of aforesaid VSVS, and this appeal may be treated as withdrawn on account of the aforesaid VSVS. Accordingly, this appeal having

Sangeeta Ajay Aggarwal Vs. ITO become infructuous, is treated as withdrawn and is hereby dismissed.

(B.1) Before we part, we hereby clarify, by way of abundant caution, that if for some reason the disputes under this appeal before us are not settled under the aforesaid VSVS, then the assessee will be at liberty to approach ITAT for restoration of this appeal in accordance with law.

(C) In the result, this appeal is dismissed.

This order was already pronounced orally on 25th August, 2022 in Open Court, in the presence of Learned Sr. Departmental Representative, after conclusion of the hearing. Now this order in writing is signed today on 30/08/2022.

More judgments on Section 10(38)

All 3,113 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(38) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →