REFOP INDIA COMPANY,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 78(1), NEW DELHI

PDF

ITA 2874/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 January 2024AY 2013-14Bench: the CIT(A) and at no point of time the assessee had filed any application for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and the issue was not settled under the said scheme. But, the assessee had opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 for the assessment orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 92CA of the Act for A.Y. 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, but the Ld. CIT(A) erroneously dismissed the appeals filed against the order passed u/s 201(1A) of the Act on the wrong findings that the assessee had opted for Vivad 4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Facts

The assessee filed appeals for AY 2013-14 to 2015-16 with a 343-day delay, which was condoned. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeals, treating them as infructuous, claiming the assessee opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) regarding orders under section 201(1A). The assessee asserted that VSVS was chosen for different assessment orders (u/s 143(3) r.w.s 92CA), not for the 201(1A) orders under appeal.

Held

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals, as the assessee had not opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for the orders passed under section 201(1A). The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on the merits after hearing the assessee.

Key Issues

Whether the CIT(A) correctly dismissed appeals as infructuous based on the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, and if the scheme applied to the specific orders under appeal.

Sections Cited

201(1A), 143(3), 92CA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI

Hearing: 17/01/2024Pronounced: 19/01/2024

ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM: There is a delay of 343 days in filing the captioned appeals.

The assessee has filed applications for condonation of delay containing that the orders impugned have not been served to the came to know about the passing of the impugned order only on 13/07/2023 when the assessee perused the income tax portal.

Considering the application for condonation of delay filed by the assessee and for the reasons stated thereof, the delay in filing the present appeals are condoned.

In the above captioned appeals pertaining to Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 filed by the assessee challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 06/09/2022 wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee as infructuous on the ground that the assessee had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had challenged the order passed by the ACIT, Circle-78(1), New Delhi u/s 201(1A) of the Act before the CIT(A) and at no point of time the assessee had filed any application for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and the issue was not settled under the said scheme.

But, the assessee had opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 for the assessment orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 92CA of the Act for Page 2 of 4 erroneously dismissed the appeals filed against the order passed u/s 201(1A) of the Act on the wrong findings that the assessee had opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. Therefore, Ld. AR sought for restoring the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on the merit of the case.

Per contra, the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the Lower Authorities.