SANJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL ,SATNA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX CIRCLE, SATNA

ITA 156/JAB/2024Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 August 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI, NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that once an assessee opts for and complies with the VSVS, the pending appeal becomes infructuous. The CIT(A) erred in passing an order on merits without affording an opportunity of being heard, violating principles of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee opted for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) to settle disputed tax liabilities for AY 2016-17. Despite the assessee complying with the VSVS and making payments, the CIT(A) passed an order on merits without providing a hearing, deeming the appeal infructuous due to VSVS compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) has the jurisdiction to pass an order on merits when the assessee has opted for and complied with the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, rendering the appeal infructuous. Whether the CIT(A) violated the principles of natural justice by not providing an opportunity of being heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 144B,Section 68,Section 10(38),Section 250,Section 4,Section 4(2),Section 4(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH “DB”, JABALPUR

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI, NIKHIL CHOUDHARY

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Mishra, Adv
For Respondent: Shri N. M. Prasad, Sr. Dr-1

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 11.09.2024, pertaining to the assessment year 2016-17. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -

“1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (Appeals), is unjustified in upholding the order passed by the assessing officer u/s 143(3) of the act 11.09.2024. 2. That the appellant has not been provided proper opportunity of being heard by the first appellant authority before passing the order dated 11.09.2024. Hence the order passed by the first a

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →