DEVENDRA KUMAR GANGAL,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 859/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 March 2022AY 2013-144 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 Act, rendering the appeal infructuous. Consequently, the appeal was treated as withdrawn and dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order concerning additions made under Section 68 and penalty proceedings. During the hearing, the assessee's representative was absent, but a letter indicated the assessee opted to settle the appeal under the Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal has become infructuous due to the assessee opting for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act, and whether the appeal should be dismissed on this ground.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 271(1)(c),Section 234B,Section 234C,Section 234D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘B’: 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)-IV, Kanpur, [Ld.

CIT(A)”, for short], dated 16.11.2017 for Assessment Year 2013-14.

Grounds taken in this appeal of Assessee are as under:

“1. The learned CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the impugned order of the learned assessing officer which is contrary to law, devoid of jurisdiction, passed without application of mind and without complying with the procedure and rules, is against equity and justice and facts of the assessee and material on record. Page 1 of 4

Devendra Kumar Gangal vs. DCIT

2.

The appellant denies his liability to tax as upheld by the learned CIT(A) and determined and computed by the learned assessing officer and the manner in which it has been so determined or computed.

3.

The learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the impugned additions of Rs.5,00,000/- us 68 regarding unsecured loan.

4.

The learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

5.

The learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the charging of interest u/s 234B, 234C & 234D of the Act.”

PRAYER

6.

The appellant craves leave and sanction of the Hon’ble ITAT to file additional evidence, if so required for proper prosecution of the case, based on facts and circumstances, which has not been or could not be educed or filed before lower authorities either because proper and sufficient opportunity was not provided or because it was not solicited or its need was not appreciated.

7.

The appellant craves leave to and permission of the Hon’ble ITAT to add to or alter any of the grounds of appeal at any time up to the final decision of the appeal.

8. The order of the AO as upheld by the learned CIT(A) be declared as null and void ab-initio, additions made by AO and upheld by Ld. CIT(A) be deleted, and the income returned be accepted as true as per law; or such other order as Your Honours may deem fit under the circumstances of the case be passed.”

(B) At the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. However, through a written communication vide letter dated 14th March, 2022, filed in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal from Page 2 of 4

Devendra Kumar Gangal vs. DCIT the assessee’s side, it has been intimated that the assessee has opted to settle the aforementioned appeal under Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (“VSVS”, for short) and that the Designated Authority has already issued Form-5 under VSVS. We took notice of the aforesaid letter dated 14.03.2022. Copies of Form-3 and Form-4 under VSVS were 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 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. Page 3 of 4

Devendra Kumar Gangal vs. DCIT (C) In the result, this appeal is dismissed.

This order was already pronounced orally on 29th March, 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 29.03.2022.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →