Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas (VSV) Scheme for a penalty appeal, which was accepted, and the appeal was dismissed as infructuous. However, for the quantum appeal, the Ld. Commissioner inadvertently considered documents from the penalty proceedings and dismissed the quantum appeal as infructuous.
Held
The Tribunal held that the Ld. Commissioner's order in the quantum appeal was a blatant mistake apparent from the record as the assessee had not opted for the VSV Scheme for this appeal. The order was set aside, and the case was remanded for fresh decision on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. Commissioner erred in dismissing the quantum appeal as infructuous by erroneously considering documents related to a penalty appeal settled under the VSV scheme.
Sections Cited
154, 250, 272A(2)(e)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI K.M. ROY
ORDER PER NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JM:
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 28/01/2025 impugned herein passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [in short, “Ld.Commissioner”] u/sec. 154 r.w.s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) for the Assessment Year (for short, “AY”) 2015-16.
2 ITA.No. 237/NAG/2025 2. It appears from the record and as demonstrated by the parties that the assessee had opted for Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 (VSV scheme) for settling the appeal qua penalty imposed u/sec. 272A(2)(e) of the Act by filing Form No.1 on dated 30/09/2020. By taking cognizance of the Form No.1 the designated Revenue Authorities issued Form Nos.3 to 5 and in pursuance to the said forms, the assessee ultimately deposited the requisite amount of ` 13,275/– as determined by the assessee designated revenue authority in Form No.4 dated 16/10/2020 and consequently by taking cognizance of the aforesaid facts, the then CIT(A) in the appeal qua penalty proceedings, vide order dated 05/01/2021 accepted the settlement of the dispute and ultimately dismissed the appeal being infructuous.
However, Ld. Commissioner in the quantum appeal, may be inadvertently or by overlooking, as demonstrated, has taken cognizance of the Form Nos. 1, 3 & 5 filed in the penalty proceedings, dismissed the quantum appeal vide order dated 27/01/2021 by holding that the appeal has become infructuous.
Consequently, the assessee challenged the said order dated 21/01/2020 by filing a rectification application before the Ld. Commissioner, who vide impugned order dated 28/01/2025 rejected the application filed by the assessee by holding that the Ld. Commissioner cannot review the appellate orders of their predecessor, maintaining the integrity and finality of appellate decisions in the income tax framework.
3 ITA.No. 237/NAG/2025 5. This is really very strange, as admittedly, the assessee has not opted for VSV Scheme in this particular quantum appeal and it was brought to the knowledge of the Ld. Commissioner by filing revision application, he has not acted diligently, thus it is blatant mistake apparent from record. Hence, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remanded to the file of Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh on merits, suffice to say by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the Assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20.06.2025.