ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), CIRCLE- 3(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

ITA 2651/BANG/2019Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 January 2021AY 2010-113 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal as the assessee had opted for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. The assessee was directed to inform the AO and persuade them to file a recall application if the settlement process failed.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2010-11. The assessee had opted to settle the issues under the Direct Taxes Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and had filed the necessary forms.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal should be kept pending when the assessee had opted for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. The secondary issue was the procedure to be followed if the settlement failed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Direct Taxes Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN & SHRI B.R. BASKARAN

For Appellant: Shri K.S. Praveen Kumar, A.R

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Hearing: 21.01.2021Pronounced: 21.01.2021

PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

The revenue has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 28-10-2019 passed by Ld CIT(A)-10, Bengaluru and it relates to the assessment years 2010-11.

The assessee has filed a letter stating that it is opting to settle the issues contested in this appeal under Direct Taxes Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and has filed Form 1 and 2. It is further stated that the assessee has not received Form no.3. Accordingly the assessee has sought adjournment of the appeal. However, the Ld A.R submitted that the Bangalore bench of Tribunal is dismissing the appeals in such kind of cases giving liberty to seek recall of the order.

M/s. Samsung R&D Institution India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 2 of 3 3. The Ld D.R, submitted that the appeal has been filed by the revenue and hence, if the appeal is dismissed and if something goes wrong with the application filed by the assessee for settlement of disputes, then the revenue should be given liberty to file application seeking recall of the order. The Ld D.R further submitted that the assessee should be directed to intimate the AO about the results of the application filed by it and if they do not go through as desired by the assessee, then the assessee should persuade the AO to file necessary application for recall of this order within the statutory time limit prescribed under the Act.

We heard the parties and perused the record. Since the assessee has already filed application under VSVS Act for the year under consideration, we are of the view that no purpose would be served in keeping this appeal pending, since the present appeal has to be withdrawn by the revenue once the dispute is settled under the above said Act. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the revenue.

However, we find merit in the submissions made by Ld D.R. Since the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed by us at the instance of the assessee, we direct the assessee to persuade the AO to file necessary application for recall of this order in accordance with law within the statutory time period, if something goes wrong in respect of applications filed by the assessee under VSVS Act.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 21st Jan, 2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →