HARMATSINGH KESHAJI RAO,MUMBAI vs. RAJEEV KUMAR SINGH, ITO- 17(1)(5), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1530/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 July 2022AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and settled the dispute. Consequently, the assessee wished to withdraw the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming additions made by the AO. The assessee later opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, and settled the dispute by paying the due taxes.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal is infructuous due to the assessee opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and settling the dispute.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

For Respondent: Ms. Smita Nair, DR
Hearing: 23/06/2022Pronounced: 27/07/2022

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 17.10.2016 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2012-13, raising following ground:

Harmatsingh K Rao 2 ITA No. 1530/M/2020

1. (a) On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. Ld. CIT(A) (a) On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. Ld. CIT(A) (a) On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the A.0 and approving the addition' erred in confirming the action of the A.0 and approving the addition' erred in confirming the action of the A.0 and approving the addition' calculated by the A.O without giving a reasonable opportunity of being calculated by the A.O without giving a reasonable opportunity of being calculated by the A.O without giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard. (b) The CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition without appreciating the (b) The CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition without appreciating the (b) The CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition without appreciating the understated vital facts that the assesse has conducted business activity in understated vital facts that the assesse has conducted business activity in understated vital facts that the assesse has conducted business activity in his saving account and so the payments for purchases cannot be his saving account and so the payments for purchases cannot be his saving account and so the payments for purchases cannot be eliminated. (c) The CIT (A) erred in (c) The CIT (A) erred in making an addition of 100% of cash deposits making an addition of 100% of cash deposits without introspecting the bank statements which clearly shows the without introspecting the bank statements which clearly shows the without introspecting the bank statements which clearly shows the presence of both sales and purchases and the addition should be presence of both sales and purchases and the addition should be presence of both sales and purchases and the addition should be restricted to the gross profit only. restricted to the gross profit only. (d) The Appellant prays that the addition of (d) The Appellant prays that the addition of entire 2882265/ entire 2882265/- made in respect of alleged purchases be deleted. respect of alleged purchases be deleted.

2.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A). erred 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A). erred 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A). erred in dismissing the ground for the appellant's plea of withdrawal of in dismissing the ground for the appellant's plea of withdrawal of in dismissing the ground for the appellant's plea of withdrawal of initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) ( initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c). 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that At the outset, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that At the outset, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and settled assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and settled assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and settled its dispute and paid the taxes due under the said scheme its dispute and paid the taxes due under the said scheme its dispute and paid the taxes due under the said scheme therefore, the assessee wishes to withdraw the captioned appeal the assessee wishes to withdraw the captioned appeal the assessee wishes to withdraw the captioned appeal. The Ld. Counsel has also filed Form Nos. 5 prescribed under the Vivad Se Counsel has also filed Form Nos. 5 prescribed under the Vivad Se Counsel has also filed Form Nos. 5 prescribed under the Vivad Se

Harmatsingh K Rao 3 ITA No. 1530/M/2020 Vishwas Act, 2020. The relevant part Vishwas Act, 2020. The relevant part in Form No. 5 is reproduced as Form No. 5 is reproduced as under:

“Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub “Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub “Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section S read with section 6 of (2) of section S read with section 6 of the Act, it is hereby certified the Act, it is hereby certified that -

(a) a sum of Rs. (a) a sum of Rs. 829610 has been paid by the declarant towards full has been paid by the declarant towards full and final settlement of tax arrear determined in the order No and final settlement of tax arrear determined in the order No and final settlement of tax arrear determined in the order No 358662900250521 358662900250521 dated 25.05.2021 and (b) the immunity is granted subject to the provi (b) the immunity is granted subject to the provisions contained in the sions contained in the Act, from instituting any proceeding for prosecution for any offence Act, from instituting any proceeding for prosecution for any offence Act, from instituting any proceeding for prosecution for any offence under the Income under the Income-tax Act or from the imposition of penalty under the tax Act or from the imposition of penalty under the said enactment[as per section 6 of the Act], in respect of the tax said enactment[as per section 6 of the Act], in respect of the tax said enactment[as per section 6 of the Act], in respect of the tax arrear as detailed in the ta arrear as detailed in the table below: Sl No. Assessment Details of dispute settled Nature of arrear Nature of arrear Amount of tax Year/Financial Year (Appeal reference number) (disputed arrear tax/disputed penalty/disputed penalty/disputed interesest/disputed interesest/disputed fee) 1. 2012- Disputed Tax 1204595 It is hereby clarified that making a declaration under this Act shall It is hereby clarified that making a declaration under this Act shall It is hereby clarified that making a declaration under this Act shall not amount to conceding the tax position and it shall not be lawful not amount to conceding the tax position and it shall not be lawful not amount to conceding the tax position and it shall not be lawful for the income for the income-tax authority or the declarant being a party in appeal tax authority or the declarant being a party in appeal or writ petition or special leave petit or writ petition or special leave petition to contend that the declarant ion to contend that the declarant or the income- -tax authority, as the case may be, has acquiesced in the tax authority, as the case may be, has acquiesced in the decision on the disputed issue by settling the dispute.” decision on the disputed issue by settling the dispute.”

Harmatsingh K Rao 4 ITA No. 1530/M/2020

3.

In view of withdrawal of the appeal iew of withdrawal of the appeal by the assessee, by the assessee, same is dismissed as infructuous. dismissed as infructuous.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →