M/S MEGRI SOFT LIMITED,CHANDIGARGH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 4(1), CHANDIGARH

PER DIVA SINGH

ITA-339&340/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 2 of 5

2. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the quantum appeal as withdrawn by appellant by stating that the appellant opted for the Vivad as Vishwas Scheme, 2020 (VsV) in respect of the above appeal even when the appellant had only opted for a penalty appeal under VsV for this year. 3. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in upholding the action of the Ld. AO, by passing the impugned order under s. 144 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961 without following the proper procedure for making the assessment under section 144 i.e. best judgment assessment, despite the fact that the appellant has been visiting the office of Ld. AO regularly. Even the notices were not served, as per the procedures provided under the Income Tax Act 1961, to the appellant and therefore the said order deserves to be quashed. 4. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO by rejecting/disallowing the claim of deduction under section 80IC of the Income Tax Act 1961, of Rs. 1,84,23,406/ from the Baddi (H.P) unit and making an addition thereof in the income of the appellant, in an arbitrary manner, only on presumptions and on the basis of wrong and erroneous data/figures/ information. 5. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO by making addition to the income for the AY 2013-14, on the basis of inspection conducted in AY 2016-17 and taking wrong and vindictive assumptions regarding the activity of Baddi unit and thereby the assessment framed by using this information deserves to be quashed. 6. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO by making addition to the income on the basis of a non-related, non-reliable information of third parties, collected by Ld. AO and even without, confronting the same to appellant, thus denying the right to rebuttal and violating the principles of natural justice and thereby the assessment framed by using this information, deserves to be quashed. 7. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal

on or before the disposal of the same.

4. The ld. AR inviting attention to the above grounds raised, specifically ground No. 2 submitted that in the facts of the ITA-339&340/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 3 of 5 present case, the assessee had approached the Revenue to settle under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme the quantum appeals in both the years and the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(b). The issue was settled under the Scheme in both the penalty appeals. The assessee informed the CIT(A) of this fact seeking withdrawal of penalty appeals in the circumstances. However, the CIT(A) acting on the application of the assessee and mis- reading it considered the quantum appeal as withdrawn and passed the order. The penalty appeal which had been settled in the ‘Vivad Se Vishwas’ to be treated as withdrawn was held to be pending incorrectly in 2013-14 assessment year. The only distinction in the two years is that in 2014-15 assessment year, both the quantum and the penalty appeals were treated as withdrawn having been settled under ‘Vivad Se Vishwas’ Scheme. However, qua the two appeals listed today, the common fact remains that in 2013-14 and 2014-15 assessment years, the quantum appeals were never settled in Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and hence have been incorrectly treated as withdrawn.

ITA-339&340/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 4 of 5

Order pronounced on 18 th January,2022.