“Vivad se Vishwas”

Settlement & AmnestyDTVSV 2020DTVSV 20204,976 judgments

The decision most relied on for Vivad se Vishwas is Damodar Valley Corpn v. Addl. CIT (66 Taxmann.com 25), cited in 14 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Vivad se Vishwas

Damodar Valley Corpn v. Addl. CIT

66 Taxmann.com 25 · 2016 · ITAT

citing judgments

The Tribunal's decision in the assessee's own case on a specific issue is binding on the Revenue for subsequent assessment years, especially when the assessee has availed the Vivad se Vishwas scheme and appeals have been dismissed on similar grounds.

Judgments citing Vivad se Vishwas

Pramod Dhanaji Patil Represented by Legar Heir Nirmala Patil, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 28(2)(4) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 249/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Pramod Dhanaji Patil Vs. Income Tax Officer, House No. 178, Kaulali Ward-28(2)(4) Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai Navi Mumbai 400701 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Alnpp8443Q Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Satyaprakash SinghFor Respondent: H.M. Bhatt

Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Indore has erred in observing that the appeal of the Appellant has become infructuous upon the filing of Form No.3 under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 as no Form no.5 was filed by the Appellant or issue by the designated authority P a g e | 2 Pramod Dhanaji ... before the ld. CIT(A). However, the Additional/JCIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that assessee has availed ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020’ by withdrawing appeal. 7. During the course of appellate proceedings before us the ld. counsel submitted that assessee has neither withdrawn

Rahul Ramesh Shelar, Thane vs. ACIT Circle-2, Kalyan

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 459/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14 Rahul Ramesh Shelar Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Pitru Chhaya Sadan, Income Tax, Circle 2 Near Railway Station, Ward No.6, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza Vangani West, Thane, Wayle Nagar, Khadakpada Maharashtra – 421503 Kalyan (W), Mumbai - 421301 Pan : Asbps3128C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 250Section 44A

requested the hon'ble CIT(A) to keep the proceedings in abeyance till Form No.5 is received in respect of petition filed under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) erred in passing an order which may be set aside since ... matter in respect of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 has not been accepted in the case of the appellant and the case is required to be decided on merit. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in not considering the following

Anil Rajaram Buchde, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 271/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Pune11 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.271/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Anil Rajaram Buchde, V The Assistant Ap Marunji, S.No.32, Tal. S Commissioner Of Income Mulshi, Near Kirti Classique, Tax, Circle-2, Pune. Pune – 411057. Pan: Bhkpb4666F Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Dated 19.12.2023 For The A.Y.2014-15. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On Facts & Circumstances Prevailing In The Case & As Per Provisions & Scheme Of The Act, It Be Held That The Order Passed By First Appellate Authority, Without Providing Any Opportunity Of Being Heard, Is In Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice & Also In Violation Of The Express Directions Issued By The Hon'Ble Income-Tax Anil Rajaram Buchde [A]

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250(6)

Anil Rajaram Buchde [A] rectification pleadings thereby holding that he had already taken recourse to the settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020 instead having adjudicated the corresponding issues on merits. He next submitted that the assessee’s limited prayer at this stage seeks directions ... nowhere established the clear cut nexus between the assessee’s alleged settlement petition dealing with the very issue under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020 vis-à- vis relief claimed u/sec.154 rectification before us. We wish to clarify that the assessee’s stand before us is that

Bal Bhavan School, Bhopal vs. DCIT Exemption, Bhopal

Appeal is allowed as mentioned above

ITA 321/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2014-15 Bal Bhavan School, Dcit (Exemption), 1, Shyamla Hills, Bhopal बनाम/ Bhopal Vs. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaaab3678G Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.06.2024

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

status of AY 2012-13 has to be ascertained. In reply, Ld. AR for assessee/appellant submitted that the assessee has opted for ‘Vivad Se Vishwas’ Scheme for that year and hence the issues stand closed. 4. The assessee has raised following grounds in this appeal: Page

Gtl Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal for AY 2016-17 & 2017-18 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 781/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 4(2)Section 5

appeal on the ground that the assessee has filed declaration under 2 ITA No. 780 & 781/Mum 2024- GTL Infrastructure Ltd. Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (VSVS) for the impugned assessment years. 2. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of providing shareable infrastructure facilities on "Build ... appeal as withdrawn by holding that – “2. During the course of appeal proceedings, the appellant submitted an application under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 to adopt the scheme before the Designated Authority. i.e. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai- 3. 2.1 In view of Section

Gtl Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal for AY 2016-17 & 2017-18 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 780/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 4(2)Section 5

Prem Devi Baid, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle 6, Jaipur

15. As a result, we allow this appeal for statistical purposes, and set aside the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A) dismissing the appeal relating to the AY 2016-17

ITA 146/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Learned Cit(Appeal) By Way Of Appeal Presented On 7.1.2019. That Is How, The Assessment Order Was Challenged.

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad (CA)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena (Adl.CIT)

Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

decided on merits. It appears to have been dismissed on the ground that the assessee had opted to avail of the benefits of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and was reported to have deposited Rs.10,000/-in terms of Form No.5 dated 15.2.2021. Before this Appellate Tribunal 4. Dismissal ... dismissed the appeal, not on merits, but on the ground that the assessee had opted to avail of the benefits of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and was reported to have deposited Rs.10,000/-in terms of Form No.5 dated 15.2.2021. 11. We have enquired from Learned AR for the assessee

Nirchem Dyes and Chemicals Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income-Tax Officer 7(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 267/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Mr. Akash KumarFor Respondent: Mr. Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. DR

Section 68

se for the reason that assessee was contemplating to opt for Vivad se for the reason that assessee was contemplating to opt for Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. However, due to shortage of the fund, the Vishwas Scheme. However, due to shortage of the fund, the Vishwas Scheme. However ... shortage of the fund, the assessee could not assessee could not opt for Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, opt for Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, therefore, could not respond to the notices is could not respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). He sued

Vivek Singhal, Ghaziabad vs. Pr. CIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 684/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2012-13 Vivek Singhal, Vs Pr. Cit, C/O Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate, Ghaziabad. 206-207, Ansal Satyam, Rdc Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – 201 002. Pan: Apqps3067Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Akhilesh Kumar & Shri Pushkar Pandey, Advocates Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.06.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 263

hearing, it came up that as per the assessee the issue stood resolved between the assessee and the Revenue in the proceedings under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) and Form No.5 under VSVS stood issued on 09.04.2021. However, the ld.PCIT, who was also the first appellate authority in the matter

Anita Anant Madpuwar, Chandrapur vs. JCIT Chandrapur Range, Chandrapur

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 410/NAG/2023[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Sujeet DeulkarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Marathe

Section 250Section 271D

learned Counsel for the assessee, by way of a letter dated 31/05/2024, submitted that since the Department has settled the taxability under Vivad Se Vishwas Tax Scheme, hence, wish to withdraw the present appeal. Accordingly, he prayed that the assessee be allowed to withdraw her appeal. The learned Departmental Representative

Pujita Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 299/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 299/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Pujita Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Mezzanine Floor, Narayani Vs Tax, Circle - 1(1), Kolkata Building 27, Brabourne Road Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaecp5112F] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Avinandan Yadav, On Behalf Of Shri Sanjay Kr. Kejriwal, Fca Revenue By : Shri Nicholas Murud, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 05/01/2024, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Representative On Behalf Of The Assessee Made Reference To The Paper Book & The Written Submission. Perusal Of The Same Indicates That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Assessee’S Appeal Filed For Assessment Year 2012-13 Against The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Dt. 12/12/2019 Framed U/S 147/143(3) Of The Act Only On The Ground That The Assessee Has Opted For Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 & Filed Form No. 1 & 2 On 23/03/2020. In The Decisions Of The Ld.

For Appellant: Shri Avinandan Yadav, on behalf of ShriFor Respondent: Shri Nicholas Murud, Addl. CIT, D/R

Section 147Section 250

Assessing Officer dt. 12/12/2019 framed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act only on the ground that the assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and filed Form No. 1 & 2 on 23/03/2020. In the decisions of the ld. 2 I.T.A. No. 299/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Pujita Constructions ... appearing at para 7, the ld. CIT(A) has reproduced Form No. 2 filed by the assessee under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, and has dismissed the appeal as withdrawn on 12/11/2020. Therefore, the only grievance of the assessee is that it had not made any payment of taxes

Multi Dimensional Asset & Wealth Creation LLP ( Eariler Multi-Dimensional Asset & Wealth Creation Private Limited), Mumbai vs. ITO Ward- 10(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as indicated above

ITA 4349/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm Multi Dimensional Asset & Wealth Creation Llp ( Earlier Ito Multi Dimensional Asset & Ward 10(2)(4) Wealth Creation Private Room No.213, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Limited) Aaykar Bhavan, C/408, Shirin Sohrab Palace, Mumbai-400 020 Nariman Point East, Mumbai-400 057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagcm7603Q

For Appellant: Mr. Vishal D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 68

account of unexplained cash credits u/s 68 amounting to Rs. 60,00,000/- without appreciating the fact that appellant had opted for Vivad se Vishwas (VSV) Scheme, 2020 for the A.Y. 2011-12. 3. a) On the facts and under the circumstances of the case ... response is received. 06. In view of the above facts, we find that when the assessee has paid due tax under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, as determined in form no.3, the assessee should have been issued Form no.5 for the settlement of dispute in this appeal, if such application

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), New Delhi, Delhi vs. Adm Agro Industries India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed for

ITA 105/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.104 & 105/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 & 2015-16 बनाम Deputy Commissioner Of Adm Agro Industries India P. Income Tax, Vs. Ltd., Circle 1(1), Kaledonia (Hdil Building), Room No.153A, C.R. Building, Level 78, Wing Office No.4A, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. Sahar Road, Opp. Vijay Nagar, Housing Society, Andheri East, Mumbai, Maharashtra. Pan No.Aahca6993E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147

that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals of the assessee as infructuous as per clause 4(2) of the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) Act, 2020 ignoring the fact that the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 142(1) of the Act was not settled under VSVS

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Adm Agro Industries India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed for

ITA 104/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 147

Anukul Commercial Private Limited., Himachal Pradesh vs. Income Tax Officer, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1478/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyi.T.A. No.1478/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

merits of the case are concerned, Ld. CIT(A) has observed that the assessee was advised to participate in Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 if it wished to do so or else furnish the written submission but since the assessee did not receive any notice of hearing

Sumermal Pukhraj Shanklesha, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4740/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Anikesh Banerjee (Jm) I.T.A. No. 4740/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ito, Ward 3(2) Sumermal Pukhraj Shanklesha Vs. 1, Station Road, Narayanwadi, Kalyan. Kalyan 421301. Pan : Aonps9463C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay R. Singh & Shri Akshay Pawar Shri Dinesh A. Chourasia Department By 28.05.2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 28.05.2024 O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran (Am) :-

Section 143(1)Section 154

made in the assessment year 2012-13 on account of change in the value of closing stock, it later settled the dispute under Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. Consequent thereto, the opening stock as on 1.4.2012 is required to be changed which will have impact on the income declared

Income Tax Officer-42(1)(2), Mumbai, Kautilya Bhawan vs. Dheeraj Babulal Shah, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3320/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar Singh, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair,Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

assessee before the ld. CIT(A). During the pendency of this appeal, assessee opted to settle the dispute under ‘The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020’, for which final certificate in form no.5 was issued. 4. Subsequently, case of the assessee was taken up for revisionary proceedings u/s.263

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl. CIT - 10 (1), Mumbai

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6025/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Bleand

Section 42(1)(a)Section 80Section 80I

appeal: - "LL. The AO ought to be directed to give reliefs arising on account of settlement of disputes under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 ["VsV] for AY 2004-05 to 2010-11 in respect of following issues: a. Treatment of enabling expenses and expenses on scientific research ... facts on record show that for the A.Y. 2004-05 to 2010-11 the assessee has settled the dispute under the direct tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The assessee has accepted the treatment of certain expenditure as capital expenditure and certain receipts as capital receipts. Therefore, in our considered

DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Indian Oil Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5979/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Bleand

Section 42(1)(a)Section 80Section 80I

M/S. Dr. M Nagaraju & Renuka Nagaraju Charitable Trust (R), Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, (Exemptions), Ward-2, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 519/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Srinath S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 11Section 12ASection 250Section 250(4)

ITAT. 4. The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the CIT(Appeals) issued notices on 27.01.2021 with regard to information regarding Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The second notice was dated 31.08.2022 asking for submissions in respect of grounds of appeal. Thereafter the CIT(A) issued notice