ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. CLITORIA VANIJYA PVT. LTD., DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal treated the appeal as withdrawn by the Revenue due to the assessee's settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The appeal was dismissed on this basis.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) deleting additions and penalties. During the hearing, the assessee informed the tribunal that they had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for settlement of the dispute.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether the Revenue's appeal should be dismissed because the assessee settled the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
(A) This appeal by Revenue is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi, [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 22.06.2017 for Assessment Year 2008-09. Grounds taken in this appeal of Revenue are as under:
“1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the additions without considering the fact that notices were issued and served on the address as per return of income and record available with Assessing Officer. The assessee did not give any intimation regarding change of address during any of the assessment proceedings.
The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty of Rs. 1,42,11,280/- imposed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act rws 274 of the Act on account of furnishing inaccurate particulars resulting in concealment of income to the extent of Rs. 4,18,10,000/-.
ITA- 5788/Del/2017 Clitoria Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law and fact in deleting the penalty of Rs. 1,42,11,280/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 imposed by the AO when the appellant did not discharge its onus of proving the identity, creditworthiness of the investors and genuinesness of the transactions during the course of assessment proceedings. 4. That the grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other.
5. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or forgo any ground(s) of appeal either before or at time hearing of the appeal.”
(B) At the time of hearing, at the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee informed us that the assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 (“VSVS”, for short) for the settlement of subject matter of the disputes in this appeal. He drew our attention to Email dated January 04, 2021 sent from assessee’s side in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”, for short) giving intimation of the same, wherein copy of Form 3 issued by Revenue in respect of aforesaid VSVS was also attached; implying acceptance of VSVS declaration of assessee by Revenue. At the time of hearing before us, the Ld. Counsel for assessee submitted before us that this appeal may be dismissed on account of the aforesaid VSVS. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Departmental Representative)
[“Ld. CIT(DR)”, for short] did not express any objection to this. After due consideration, and in view of the foregoing; we treat this appeal as withdrawn by Revenue on account of the aforesaid VSVS. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed being treated as withdrawn.
(B.1) Before we part, we hereby clarify, by way of abundant caution, that if for some reason it is found by Revenue that the disputes under this appeal before us are not fully settled under the aforesaid VSVS, then Revenue will be at liberty to approach ITAT for restoration of this appeal, in accordance with law.
ITA- 5788/Del/2017 Clitoria Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. (B.2) With these directions, the aforesaid appeal of Revenue is dismissed, being treated as withdrawn.
(C) For statistical purposes, this appeal is dismissed.
This order was already pronounced on 05th January, 2021 in Open Court, in the presence of Representatives of both sides; after conclusion of the hearing.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Tyre Center vs. The Superintendent Of CGSTAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026