“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

3M India Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 168/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Ms. Shruti Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Divya K.J., D.R

Section 143(3)Section 91(2)Section 92Section 92(1)

Page 2 of 3 VSVS,2024 and filed the Form 1 DTVSV 2024 for the settlement of the disputes under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas, 2024 and the ld. PCIT had already issued the Form-2 vide DIN/Acknowledgement No. 273618081080725 determining the refund of Rs.2

The Nanital Bank Ltd., Nanital vs. PCIT, Bareilly, Nanital

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed as

ITA 67/DDN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun10 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 67/Ddn/2024 (A.Y 2018-19) The Nainital Bank Ltd. Vs Pcit H.O.- 7, Oaks Building, Nani Central Revenue Building, Bank House Mallital, Nainital, Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Nainital, Uttarakhand Lines, Bareilly, Nainital, Pan: Aaact5714D Uttarakhand Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri K. R. Rastogi, Ca Revenue By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Jcit, Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/09/2025

23/03/2024 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee’s Representative submitted that, Assessee has opted to avail benefits of ‘Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024’ (‘DTVSVS’), therefore, sought for dismissal of the Appeal with a liberty to approach this Tribunal in case of rejection of application

Ashwani Dwivedi, Bhilai, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer-1(3), Bhilai, Durg

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

ITA 498/RPR/2025[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Raipur10 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.498/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Ashwani Dwivedi M/S. Vandana Steel Traders, Junwani Road, Pushpak Nagar, Bhilai-490 020 (C.G.), Dist. Durg Pan: Aiapd9101B

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 44A

guidance and advice from the counsel. The appellant relied upon his accountant in this matter. The counsel first advised to opt for VSVS (Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme), 2020 and filed some of the forms and thereafter, refused to opt for that. The appellant could not file his submissions before

Quintiles Inc., Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) Cir 3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 728/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Dr. Divya K.J., D.R

Section 143(3)Section 91(2)Section 92Section 92(1)

settle the cases under VSVS,2024 and filed the Form 1 DTVSV 2024 for the settlement of the disputes under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas, 2024 and the ld. CIT had issued the Form-2 vide DIN/Acknowledgement No.862180271060225 for the AY 2012-13 & vide DIN/Acknowledgement No.862288181060225

Quintiles Inc., Mumbai vs. DCIT (Intl. Tax) Range 3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 2104/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Dr. Divya K.J., D.R

Section 143(3)Section 91(2)Section 92Section 92(1)

Nahid Khatoon, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1135/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P. Vinod, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR

Section 271(1)(c)

During the appellate proceedings, on 25.08.2020, the assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that he would be opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (“VSVS”) and accordingly requested that the matter be kept in abeyance. However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee holding that since

Indiawin Sports P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT (Central Circle) 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 260/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year : 2017-18 Indiawin Sports Private Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Court House, Income Tax, Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Vs. Central Circle-6(2), Dhobi Talao, Air India Building, Mumbai-400002 Nariman Point, Pan : Aadcr8195F Mumbai-400021 (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : None For Revenue : Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-09-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04-09-2025

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr.DR

under: “With reference to the captioned appeal, the Appellant submits that it has opted to settle the said appeal under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 ("VSV Scheme, 2024"). Accordingly, a declaration and waiver of right in Form No. 1 have been filed with the Designated Authority

Syntel Solutions (India) P. Ltd, Pune vs. Asst CIT Cir 10, Pune

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1882/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawalsyntel Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd., Ground Floor S2 Software, Block Plot No. B-1/B-2, Dehu Alandi Road Midc, Talwadi, Software Technology Park ............... Appellant Pune - 412114 Pan: Aadct5744N V/S

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)

permission to withdraw the appeal on the basis that the tax dispute for the year under consideration has been settled under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 and the order for full and final settlement in Form no.4 has been issued by the Designated Authority after payment

Shri Kanhaiya Lal Saraf, Ambikapur (Cg) vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ambikapur, Ambikapur (Cg)

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

ITA 172/RPR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.172/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Kanhaiya Lal Saraf Sadar Road, P.O Ambikapur, Dist. Sarguja (C.G) Pan: Apeps2292D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-Ambikapur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sethia, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 254(2)

further carried the matter as second appeal before the ITAT, Raipur in ITA No.172/RPR/2017. Meanwhile, the Government of India notified the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and for availing the aforesaid settlement scheme, the assessee as per the mandatory condition applied for withdrawal of the appeal before ... Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1 and requested for issuance of Form No.5 on 10.07.2024. The assessee had also filed Form No.1 under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 on 24.11.2024. However, the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1 rejected Form No.1 vide order dated 28.11.2024 as no appeal

M/S Lorgan Lifestyle Ltd., Pune vs. ITO, Ward14(4), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

ITA 215/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri B S RajpurohitFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 143(3)Section 250

Appellant company came to know about the order passed by the CIT, Appeals only on receipt messages from Income Tax Department to avail Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) in December 2024. On checking the status of the appeal, the company realized that CIT, Appeals has passed an order on 24th

M/S Valco Industries Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT-CC-1, Chandigarh

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 125/CHANDI/2021[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 125/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05 Valco Industries Ltd., Vs The Dcit, Sco 37, Sector 26, Central Circle-1, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacv5195J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Revenue By : Shri Yogesh Monga, Ca Assessee By : Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2025 Physical Hearing O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Monga, CA

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

30/CHD/2008). 9. The assessee carried this matter in appeal before Hon'ble High Court and it has settled the dispute under ‘'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme’ and only aggregate of taxes plus 25% could be charged from the assessee on settlement of the dispute under 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020’. A.Y.2004-05 ... other hand, is unable to controvert, rather he brought to our notice the clarification issued regarding 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020’ on 04.03.2020 by Government of India, Ministry of Finance vide Circular No. 7/2020. He read over question No.34 and its answer. 11. We have duly considered the rival contentions

Auric Merchandising Services Private Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 1(1) Delhi, Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 4260/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ranjeet Kesarwani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Mahajan, Sr. DR

opted to settle the Page 1 of 3 ITA No. 4260 /DEL/2024 Auric Merhandising Vs ACIT [A.Y 2012-13] issues under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 [in short ‘VSVS’]. The assessee has placed on record copy of Form No. 1 filed under VSVS, 2024. 3. However, the ld. counsel ... counsel for assessee prayed for liberty to revive the appeal in case application of assessee fails to mature for any reason under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 if he withdraws the appeal. 4. The ld. DR raised no objection to withdrawal of appeal by the assessee. 5. Both sides heard

Ganpat Singh Patel, Balaghat vs. ITO Ward, Balaghat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 53/JAB/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2014-15 Ganpat Singh Patel V. Ito Ward, Balaghat Prem Nagar, Balaghat H.O. Railway Station Road, Balaghat, Balaghat, 481001, Balaghat-481001. Madhya Pradesh. Pan:Aeopp9849L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashok Vijaywargiya, Adv Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 20 08 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 08 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Vijaywargiya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. CIT(DR)

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 54B

outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the dispute has been settled under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 and prayed for withdrawal of the appeal. And a letter dated 20.08.2025 along with Form no. 1 & 2 is placed on record. The relevant contents ... order passed u/s 250 dated 28.03.2024 for Assessment Year 2014-15. The assessee has since opted for resolution of the dispute under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 and has complied with the requirements thereunder. The duly signed withdrawal application is attached herewith for consideration of this Hon’ble Bench

Anju Neotia, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 34(1), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed to be withdrawn

ITA 1339/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Aug 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Your Lordship That In Order To Buy Peace & Avoid Unwanted Litigation, I Have Opted To Settle The Instant Matter By Way Of Making A Declaration Under The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. Accordingly, I Have Filed Form 1 As Prescribed Under The Aforesaid Scheme. In Response To Form Filed By Me, The Designated Authority Under Which My Jurisdiction Is Vested, Has Issued Form 2. A Letter For Withdrawal Of Appeal Was Filed Before Your Lordship On 15.01.2025 (Copy Enclosed) & Along With The Said Letter Copies Of Form 1 & Form 2 Were Also Submitted For Your Kind Perusal. Thereafter, I Have Filed Form 3 As Prescribed Under The Scheme & The Designated Authority Is In The Process Of Issuing Form

Section 250

peace and avoid unwanted litigation, I have opted to settle the instant matter by way of making a declaration under The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. Accordingly, I have filed Form 1 as prescribed under the aforesaid scheme. In response to form filed by me, the Designated Authority ... above, I would request your honour to treat the instant appeal as withdrawn and pass necessary orders as required under The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 and The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Rules, 2024. We hope you will do the needful at the earliest.” 1.2 Considering

Chhaya Masurkar, Balaghat vs. NFAC, ITO Balaghat, Balaghat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 61/JAB/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur26 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshrachhaya Masurkar V. National Faceless Appeal 1, Ward No. 9, Ram Mandir Center (Nfac) Road, Katangi, Balaghat (Mp)- Delhi (Jurisdiction Officer, 481445. Income Tax Officer, Balaghat (Mp)-110001. Pan:Cakpm8662A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vijay Bagrecha, Ca Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) O R D E R (A) The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)- Delhi, Dated 23.02.2024 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Assessee Are As Under: -

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Bagrecha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 69A

Authorized Representative (“Ld. AR”, for short) for the assessee informed that the assessee has opted to settle the aforementioned appeal under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 (“DTVSVS”, for short) and that the Designated Authority has already issued Form -2 and Form - 3 under DTVSVS, 2024. He also drew

Faurecia India Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -8, Pune

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 821/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 143(3)

dated 13.08.2025 seeking withdrawal of the appeal on the ground that the assessee has opted to settle the dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. The assessee has also received Form 2 from the competent authority. Ld. Departmental Representative has no objection for withdrawal of appeal. Therefore

ACIT., Circle-1, Karimnagar vs. Co Operative Electric Supply Society Limited, Siricilla

ITA 207/HYD/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Aug 2025

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Shri C. Lalith KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Posu Babu Alli, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

have all been put to rest by the counter party viz., REC by preferring settlement under the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme, 2000 and a Certificate to this effect has been provided by them for submission before the Hon'ble members for consideration and concluding the appeal. 4) On the facts ... subjected to tax in respect of the interest income on the Special Reserve Funds, had opted to get the same settled under the “Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020” for the entire period from 1999-2000 to 2017-18. The Ld. AR to support his contention had taken us through

Shri. Balaji Vividodeeshagala Souharda Sahakari Sangha Niyamita, Haveri vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haveri

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

ITA 827/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh Nagraj Gaddi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department

Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 80P

passed by the ld. CIT(A). The assessee came to know about the order only when he received a promotional notice under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, upon which he consulted his tax professional. It is further explained that the delay occurred on account of lapses and negligence

Lata Prakash Maradia, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward - 42(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1945/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Lata Prakash Maradia Ito Ward – 42(1)(2) Flat No. 105, 1St Floor, Building N.2A, Kautilya Bhavan, Rna N.G Sunity Phase I Chs Ltd, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Thakur Village, Kandivali (E), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400101. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Apppm 9292 J Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Jigar Mehta

Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

further appeal n further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) noted that the assesse Ld. CIT(A) noted that the assessee opted for Vivad Vivad-se-Vishwas scheme,2024 for the settlement of dispute for the addition of Rs. for the settlement of dispute for the addition ... subject to section 271(1)(c) of the Act, subject to compliance with the compliance with the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. However, the Lata Prakash Maradia 7 assessee failed to deposit the tax determined under the said scheme assessee failed to deposit

Saini Sabha Rewari, Rewari vs. ACIT, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed as

ITA 1215/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Year 2011-12 and 2012-13 respectively. 2. The Assessee’s Representative submitted that, Assessee has opted to avail benefits of ‘Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024’ Saini Sabha Vs. ACIT (‘DTVSVS’) and submitted the applications for withdrawing the captioned Appeals, therefore, sought for dismissal of the Appeals