Loading judgment…
Facts
For AY 2010-11, the assessee's assessment under Section 144 led to an addition of Rs. 3.43 crore under Section 68 for unexplained cash credit (share capital/premium). The CIT(A) had set aside this assessment to the AO, and the assessee appealed to the ITAT against the CIT(A)'s order. During the ITAT proceedings, the assessee informed the tribunal of its decision to opt for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 (VSVS 2024) by filing Form 1 and requested the appellate proceedings be kept in abeyance.
Held
The tribunal declined the assessee's request to keep the appellate proceedings in abeyance. It decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, noting that the assessee had chosen an alternate remedy under VSVS-2024. The tribunal, however, granted the assessee liberty to seek restoration of the appeal if the final settlement order (Form 4) under VSVS-2024 is not passed by the designated authority.
Key Issues
Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal should keep the appeal in abeyance or dismiss it as withdrawn when the assessee has opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024, to settle the tax dispute.
Sections Cited
Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 115JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 251 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 91 of The Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 (Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM
आदेश / O R D E R
Per Arun Khodpia, AM:
The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 17.11.2024, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O. under Sec. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 18.12.2017, for the assessment year 2010-11.
2. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal:
1. That the assessment order passed by the DCIT - [Circle 1(1), Bilaspur] u/s. 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961 (Act) as well as the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT (Appeals) is unjustified, arbitrary, excessive, contrary to evidences and bad in law.
That the authorities below have not considered the facts of the case provided in the Appeal Memo and disposed off the Appeal.
3. That the authorities below have not provided sufficient/proper opportunity to the assessee to present its case with all evidences thereby violating the principle of Natural Justice. 4. That the Ld. CIT (A) has erred both in law and facts of the case by setting aside the case and referred back to the assessing officer for making a fresh assessment without providing any opportunity. 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) before disposing off the appeal would have considered the facts of the case and would have provided sufficient opportunity to the appellant to explain its case with proper evidences/written submission. 6. That CIT (A) would have provided the opportunity of submitting the written submissions and dispose of the appeal after considering the written submission. 7. That the appellant craves leave to add alter, delete, modify or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal as may be required for adjudication of the case.
Brief facts in this case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 30.09.2010 disclosing total loss of Rs. 1,93,15,652/- and offered tax u/s 115JB on a book profit at Rs.1,00,26,090/-. Scrutiny assessment was completed against the assessee u/s 144 of the Act on 18.12.2017 by making an addition of Rs.3,43,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act on account of unexplained cash credit received in the garb of share capital and share premium, determining the assessed income at Rs.1,49,84,350/-
Aggrieved with the aforesaid addition, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), however, the impugned assessment u/s 144 dated 18.12.2017 set aside to the files of Ld. AO in terms of powers conferred upon the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 251 of I. T. Act, 1961 (as amended by Finance Act, 2024 w.e.f. 01.10.2024).
Aggrieved with the aforesaid order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee instituted an appeal before us, the same is under consideration in instant case.
In this case, at the threshold of the hearing, though no-one has appeared on behalf of the assessee, however, it is noticed that a letter dated 17.01.2025, to keep the appellate proceedings in abeyance has been filed by the AR of the assessee. Copy of the letter so furnished along with Form1 under DTVSV 2024 is extracted as under:
Though in present case, it is submitted that the assessee had already initiated the proceedings under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 (VSVS 2024) by filing of Form 1 and undertaking, in order to settle the dispute involved in the captioned appeal. The assessee had requested to keep the appellate proceedings in abeyance on account of its preference to go for VSVS-2024, but we are not inclined to accept such request. Rather, we find it appropriate to dismiss the appeal of the assessee, treating the same as withdrawn, as the assessee had already filed Form 1 by opting the alternate remedy available under VSVS-2024, thus, there is no need to keep the matter pending for adjudication on merits.
Per contra, Shri S. L. Anuragi, Ld. CIT-DR, on behalf of the revenue, did not raise any objection, if the present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
Considering the aforesaid factual position, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. Before parting, we may herein observe that in case the order under VSVS-2024 for full and final settlement of tax arrears in “Form 4” is not passed by the designated authority, then the assessee will remain at a liberty to seek restoration of the subject appeal.
Resultantly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn in terms of the aforesaid observations.
Order pronounced in the open court on 23/01/2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (RAVISH SOOD) (ARUN KHODPIA) �ाियक सद� / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद� / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER रायपुर/Raipur; िदनांक Dated 23/01/2025 Vaibhav Shrivastav आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant- Scan Ispat Limited, Raigarh 1. ��थ� / The Respondent- DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur 2. 3. The Pr. CIT, Raipur (C.G.) 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर/ DR, ITAT, Raipur गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 5.