SMT YOGITA HARESH VORA,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD-34(3)(5), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6215/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 January 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, HON'BLE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that as per CBDT Circular No. 7/2020, if payment is not made under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme, the declaration becomes null and void. Therefore, the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee opted for the Vivad Se Vivad Scheme and filed Forms 1 and 2. Form 3 was issued requiring payment by 31.03.2021. The assessee failed to make the payment. The CIT(A) treated the appeal as withdrawn, and a subsequent rectification application to revive the appeal was also dismissed.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in treating the appeal as withdrawn when the assessee failed to make payment under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme, despite CBDT clarification.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, Adv. & Aadnya Bhandari, Adv
Hearing: 14/01/2025Pronounced: 14/01/2025

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No. 6214/Mum/2024
I.T.A. No. 6215/Mum/2024

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Assessee by : Shri Nishit Gandhi, Adv. & Aadnya Bhandari, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 14/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 14/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: & 17/10/2023 by Commissioner of income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter ‘the ld. CIT(A)’] pertaining to AY 2015-16.

2.

Since common issues are involved in both the appeals, they were heard together and are disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

3.

The quarrel revolves around the fact that the assessee opted for Vivad Se Vivad Scheme and filed Form No. 1 and 2. Form No.3 was issued by the CIT and the assessee was required to make the payment as per the Scheme by 31.03.2021. & 2 4. Since the assessee had filed Form No.3, the CIT(A) treated the appeal filed before him as deemed to be withdrawn.

5.

Since the assessee did not pay the taxes as per the Scheme, she prayed for the revival of the appeal by way of a rectification application. The same was also dismissed as the appeal filed by the assessee was deemed to be withdrawn.

6.

Representatives of both the sides were heard together at length. Case records carefully perused.

7.

The CBDT Circular No.7 of 4th March, 2020 at Question No.49 answered as under: “Question No.49 Once declaration is filed under Vivad se Vishwas, and for financial difficulties, payment is not made accordingly, will the declaration be null and void? Answer: Yes it would be void.”

8.

As per the above answer of the Board, it is crystal clear that if the assessee does not make the payment of the taxes, her declaration shall be treated as null and void. Since in the case in hand after filing the declaration the assessee did not pay the taxes, her declaration shall be treated as null and void and the CIT(A) ought to have decided the appeal on merits of the case.

9.

Therefore, in line with the CBDT Circular (supra), we restore both the captioned appeals to the file of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to decide the grievance afresh after affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Both the appeals are deemed to be allowed.

10.

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →