ANURAG JHAWAR,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD - 1(1), FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 537/DEL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 July 2022AY 2014-154 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 the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) and the Designated Authority had issued Form-5. The appeal was therefore rendered infructuous and treated as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against the CIT(A)'s confirmation of an addition of Rs 80,05,089/- on account of alleged ingenuine Long Term Capital Gain. The assessee had also raised an additional ground challenging the validity of reasons recorded under Section 148(2).

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal has become infructuous due to the assessee opting for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The validity of reasons recorded under Section 148(2) was also challenged.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’: 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), Faridabad [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 27.11.2019 for Assessment Year 2014-15. Grounds taken in this appeal of Assessee are as under:

“The Learned CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs 80,05,089/- holding the Long Term Capital Gain ingenuine and further erred in ignoring the fact that the addition made by Ld. Assessing Officer was without his independent finding.

Anurag Jhawar vs. ITO 2. The Learned CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition made by Ld. Assessing Officer of Rs 80,05,089/- contrary to facts and circumstances of the case and the applicable law; 3. The assessee craves leave to add, delete, amend and modify any grounds of the appeal before and/or at the time of hearing of the appeal.

Additional Ground:-

4.

The addition of Rs. 80,05,089/- confirmed is erroneous because reasons recorded U/s 148(2) were invalid in as much as they apparently does not reveal the examination of the material by the Ld. Assessing Officer and his independent view forming the belief that purported income escaped assessment.”

(B) The assessee, vide letter dated 06.07.2022, submitted that the assessee has opted for Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 (“VSVS”, for short) and that the Designated Authority has already issued Form-5 under VSVS. A copy of Form-5 issued by the Designated Authority was also enclosed with the aforesaid letter; and the assessee applied for withdrawal of appeal. The ld. Senior Departmental Representative for Revenue submitted before us, at the time of hearing, that the appeal has become infructuous in view of the assessee opting for VSVS; and that the appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn. After due consideration and in view of the Anurag Jhawar vs. ITO foregoing, we are of the opinion that this appeal has become infructuous on account of aforesaid VSVS, and that this appeal may be treated as withdrawn on account of the aforesaid VSVS.

Accordingly, this appeal having 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 6th July, 2022 in Open Court. Now this order in writing is signed today on 07.07.2022.

More judgments on Section 148(2)

All 84 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148(2) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →