MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE-7(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4264/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 April 2024AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) mistakenly assumed the assessee had opted for the VSV scheme. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the case was remanded for a decision on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed an order where the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal based on the assessee opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas (VSV) scheme. However, the assessee claims they never opted for the VSV scheme in relation to the assessment order being appealed.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal based on a mistaken assumption that the assessee had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 153C,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

For Appellant: Shri Sahil Shah, A.R
For Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, D.R

O R D E R

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

1.

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 31.03.2022, impugned herein, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2013-14.

2.

At the outset, both the parties have submitted that there is inadvertent mistake apparent from impugned order, as the Ld. 2 M/s. Macrotech Developers Limited Commissioner has decided the appeal against the order dated 30.12.2016 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 143(3) of the Act on the ground that the Assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme in this case, whereas the assessee never opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme in this case.

3.

In fact, the Assessee during the pendency of appeal before the Ld. Ld. CIT(A)-49, Mumbai against the assessment order dated 24.12.2019 under section 153C read with section 147 of the Act , has opted for VSV Scheme and paid the relevant taxes and Revenue Department issued Form no 3 and 5 which were taken into consideration the said Ld. CIT(A) who, vide order dated 14.12.2021, dismissed the appeal of the assessee as dismissed as withdrawn on the ground that the assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. 4. Therefore, inference can be drawn that the Ld. Commissioner while passing the impugned order which is under consideration, may have taken into consideration availing the VSV Scheme in the case emanated from Assessment order dated 24.12.2019 u/s 153C read with section 147 of the Act. And therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside, as the assessee never opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme in the instant case relevant to the assessment order dated 30.12.2016 u/s 143(3) of the Act. 5. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances stated above, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision on merits, suffice to say by affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 3 M/s. Macrotech Developers Limited

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 30.04.2024.

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →