GURINDER SINGH vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER

PDF · subscribers
CWP/14889/2021HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01069380202125 August 2021Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the petitioner could not be disentitled from moving under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme once it was not denied that the rectification application was pending with the Income Tax Department, even if with a different Assessing Officer, before the issue of Form 3. The Court found the revenue's contention that the application was filed before a wrong authority to be a wrong conclusion. The Court allowed the appeal, directing the revenue to issue Form 3 as per the corrected income. The ratio is that a pending rectification application, even if initially filed with a different officer, should not disqualify an assessee from the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme if it was pending before the issuance of Form 3.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Gurinder Singh, filed a writ petition challenging orders dated July 5, 2021, and April 22, 2020, which declined his application under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The primary reason for rejection was that no application was pending as of January 31, 2021. The dispute centered on a rectification application filed on January 27, 2021. The revenue contended this application was filed before the wrong authority and thus not processed. The revenue also argued that Form 3 was issued before the rectification application was received by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, invalidating the rectification order under Section 154.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner's application for rectification, filed on January 27, 2021, was pending before the proper authority for the purpose of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, considering it was filed before the issue of Form 3? Assessee's Contention: The application for rectification was filed before the proper officer, and its pendency should entitle the petitioner to the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Revenue's Contention: The rectification application was filed before a wrong authority and was not processed. Furthermore, Form 3 was issued prior to the receipt of the rectification application by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, rendering the Section 154 rectification order invalid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

214 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP No.14889 of 2021 (O&M) Date of decision : 25.08.2021 Gurinder Singh ...... Petitioner versus Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and another

...... Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE ALKA SARIN *** Present : Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. M.S.Kanda, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the respondents. *** AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral)

By this petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the orders dated 05.07.2021 (Annexure P-8) and 22.04.2020 (Annexure P-9) whereby his application under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme has been declined primarily on the ground that no application was pending on 31.01.2021. Reply on behalf of the respondents has been filed and the same is taken on record. Copy supplied to the counsel opposite. The primary dispute is with regard to document (Annexure P-2) which was an application for rectification admittedly filed on 27.01.2021. The contention of the respondents is that this application was filed before a wrong authority and therefore was never processed. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has argued that this is a wrong conclusion and the application was filed before the proper officer. POOJA SHARMA 2021.08.31 02:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP No.14889 of 2021 (O&M) -2- The second contention of the learned counsel for the revenue- respondents is that as Form 3 was issued prior to receipt of rectification application with Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and therefore rectification order issued u/s 154 of the Act was not valid. Be that as it may, it is not denied that rectification application of the assessee was pending with the Income Tax Department (though with a different Assessing Officer) before the issue of Form 3. Once this is so, in our considered opinion, petitioner could not be held dis-entitled to move under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Resultantly, the appeal is allowed with the direction to Revenue to issue Form 3 as per corrected income. Since the main case has been decided, the pending Civil Misc. Application, if any, also stands disposed of.

( AJAY TEWARI )

JUDGE

( ALKA SARIN ) JUDGE 25.08.2021 pooja sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No POOJA SHARMA 2021.08.31 02:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

More judgments on Section 154

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →