Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal against a re-opened assessment order was dismissed by the CIT(A) on the erroneous assumption that the assessee had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) against the re-opened assessment. The assessee clarified that the VSVS application was filed against the original assessment, not the re-opened one.
Held
The tribunal found that the CIT(A) made a factual error in dismissing the appeal based on the VSVS scheme. It set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back for a fresh adjudication on merits.
Key Issues
The primary legal issue was whether the CIT(A) correctly dismissed the appeal based on the assessee's participation in the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, and the validity of the re-assessment proceedings under Section 147/148.
Sections Cited
Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 144B, Section 250, Section 68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM
O R D E R
Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, AM:
This appeal for Assessment Year (‘AY’) 2013-14 filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06.11.2025 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [‘CIT(A)’], National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’), Delhi passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’).
2. The grounds of appeal
raised by the assessee are under:
1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal on an erroneous and unfounded assumption that the appellant had Vardaan Infrastructures Pvt Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward 4(1) opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, whereas, in fact, the appellant had never filed any declaration under the said scheme. Therefore, the impugned order is based on incorrect facts and deserves to be quashed.
That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act dated 28/03/2021 by the assessing officer is illegal and barred by limitation as per first proviso to section 147 of the Act.
That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the notice u/s 148 of the Act has been issued by the assessing officer on change of opinion, hence, illegal and bad in law.
That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the notice u/s 148 of the Act has been issued on the basis of an audit objection and without independent application of mind, hence, illegal and bad in law.
5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 30/03/2022 is illegal and void ab initio.
6. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in 6 law, the assessing officer erred in making addition of Rs. 50,11,769/-under the head capital gain.
7. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in making addition u/s 68 of the Act of Re. 2,19,14,303/- on account of share application money and unsecured loan.
The appellant craves to add, alter OR DLEETE any of the grounds of appeal during the course of appellate proceedings.”
3. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that the assessee filed its original Income Tax Return (‘ITR’) of the relevant year on 31.03.2014 declaring income of Rs.2,17,900/-. The case was picked up for scrutiny and consequential assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on 31.03.2016. Later, the case was re-opened under section 148 of the Act. In response to the show- Vardaan Infrastructures Pvt Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward 4(1) cause notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed its ITR on 12.11.2021 declaring income of Rs.2,17,900/- (the income disclosed in original ITR). The re-opened assessment was completed at income of Rs.2,73,29,922/- vide order dated 30.03.2022 passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal as under: “2. During appellate proceedings, as per details available on record, it is noted that Form 5 under Direct Taxes Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 dated 20.12.2021 has been issued by designated Authority i.e. the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Raipur for A.Y. 2013-14 under consideration covering captioned appeal. Since appellant has opted to avail benefit of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. Considering the request of assessee present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.”
4. At the outset, Shri Praveen Khandelwal, Ld. Authorized Representative (‘AR’) of the assessee drew our attention to the fact that the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in dismissing the appeal on the reasoning that the assessee had filed an application under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 [‘VSVS’]. He submitted that the assessee had filed an application under VSVS against the original assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act on 31.03.2016 and not against the reopened assessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 30.03.2022. Thus, there was a factual mistake on the part of the Ld. CIT(A). He, therefore, prayed for remanding the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal denovo.
Dr. Priyanka Patel, Ld. Sr. DR did not raise any objection to the request of the Ld. AR.
We have heard both parties and perused the material available on the record. We find merit in the submission of the Ld. AR that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal on the reasoning that the assessee has filed an application under VSVS. Considering the facts in entirety and without offering any categorical finding on the merit of the case, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal afresh/denovo. Ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed as above. Order pronounced in the open court on 11/02/2026.