SHRI INDERPAL SINGH,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal rejected the adjournment application due to lack of merits and bonafide reasons, noting multiple opportunities were given. The appeal was dismissed with a liberty to revive if the VsV declaration is not accepted.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order. The assessee sought adjournments to await the acceptance of a declaration filed under the Vivad Se Vishwas (VsV) scheme, citing technical issues with tax credit adjustment.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal should be adjourned pending the resolution of a VsV scheme declaration, and the validity of the penalty order.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
This appeal has been filed by the by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana dated 08.12.2017 in respect of Assessment Year: 2005-06.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
Inderpal Singh v. Dy.CIT “1. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the levy of penalty of Rs. 4,37,580/-, as imposed by the ld. AO, on wholly erroneous and insufficient grounds.
2. That the ld. CIT(A) erred in law to hold that the order under appeal was not barred by time in terms of proviso to section 275(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
That the order under appeal is against law and facts of the case.”
2. The adjournment application filed by the appellant has no merits and bonafide reason for seeking adjournment. The content reads as under:
“The above appeal of assessee is now fixed for hearing before the Hon’ble Bench to day i.e. 26.07.2023. It was earlier adjourned sine/die since the declaration filed under VsV was still pending acceptance by competent authority for the reason that credit for tax due, by adjustment of seized cash of Rs.15.50 lacs had not been allowed for some technical snags. The matter still hangs fire and I approached the PCIT, Jalandhar about two weeks back to short out the above issue. She spoke to the DCIT CC-1, Jalandhar and he assured to do the needful at the earliest. But the final word is still awaited.
In view of the above position, it is requested that the matter be kindly adjourned for another two weeks to await the finality of VsV filed by assessee.”
3. From the application, it is evident that despite as many as 7 opportunities of being heard granted to the appellant, he could not produce the VSVS acceptance certificates from the department. Although, he claims that declaration filed under VsVs was still pending for acceptance by competent authority for the reason that credit for tax due, by way of Inderpal Singh v. Dy.CIT adjustment of seized cash of Rs.15.50 lacs had not been allowed for some technical snags. In our view, the appeal cannot be kept in abeyance by way of merely granting adjournment without reasonable cause and therefore the assessee’s application is rejected, being devoid of merits.
After hearing the Ld. DR for the department, it is decided to adjudicate the appeal. Admittedly, the ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assesse had applied for VSVS scheme in the matter vide application dated 16/10/2022 wherein it was stated that owing to some non-adjustment of seized cash towards arrears, the matter is yet to be resolved by the department. In view of that matter, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee with a caveat that the assessee is permitted to revive its appeal if assessee’s declaration filed under “Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020” is not accepted by the department.
In the backdrop of the aforesaid discussion, the appeal of the assessee is disposed of in the terms indicated as above.
Order pronounced in the open court on 02.08.2023
More judgments on Section 275(1)(a)
- Chintakunta Munayagari Gopal, Hyderabad vs DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), HyderabadITA 1912/HYD/2025[2011-12]Status: Disposed5 Aug 2026AY 2011-12
- Bheemaiah Nandigam, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward - 2(1), GunturITA 601/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Jun 2026AY 2019-20
- Bheemaiah Nandigam, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward - 2(1), GunturITA 600/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed19 Jun 2026AY 2018-19
- Bheemaiah Nandigam, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward 2- (1), GunturITA 430/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Jun 2026AY 2019-20
- Bheemaiah Nandigam, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward 2(1), GunturITA 429/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed19 Jun 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
