← All Phrases

“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
14
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

Krishna Kumar Soni, Ujjain vs. ITO-1(2) Ujjain, Ujjain

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 500/IND/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2010-11 Shri Krishna Kumar Soni, Ito, Daak Bangla Road, 1(2), बनाम/ Tarana Ujjain Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Ahcps5349F Assessee By Shri Sharad Jain, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.05.2024

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

raised following grounds of appeal :- 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissed the appeal. 2. The appellant had applied under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme & Form 5 was also issued and thus no, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) can be imposed. 3. As the email id and mobile ... sustainable and the same is liable to be deleted. He has further submitted that thereafter the assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020, and settled the dispute as per Form 5 issued by the Competent Authorities on 31st October, 2021. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental

Compagnie Ibm France, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 546/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos.490 & 491/Bang/2024

Section 271

stage of assessment proceedings. Parallelly, IBM India Private Limited (“IBM India") had also opted for the settlement option under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (“VsV”) to settle the pending litigations with Page 6 of 56 IT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 & IT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024

Ibm China Hong Kong Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 500/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

stage of assessment proceedings. Parallelly, IBM India Private Limited (“IBM India”) had also opted for the settlement option under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (“VsV”) to settle the pending litigations with IT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 & IT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024 IBM Canada Limited & Others ... Australia was challenged before the ITAT. Thereafter, the appeal was withdrawn because IBM Australia chose to settle the litigations under the Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. Therefore, it cannot be said that the issue was settled in the case of IBM Australia

Ibm Australia Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 488/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

stage of assessment proceedings. Parallelly, IBM India Private Limited (“IBM India") had also opted for the settlement option under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (“VsV”) to settle the pending litigations with Page 6 of 56 IT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 & IT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024

Tenova Technologies Private Limited, Thane vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 233/BANG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Ashik Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, JCIT(DR)
Section 250Section 4Section 4(2)Section 4(6)

observing that the assessee has settled the issue in dispute vide sub. Sec. (2) of sec. 4 r.w.s 5(1) of Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act (DTVSVA) 2020, whereas the assessee has not settled this issue under this scheme. 4. The assessee before us filed a detailed submissions

Dev Darshan Designs Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 14(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 34/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.34/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dev Darshan Designs Pvt. Ltd.……….......................…...……………....Appellant P-40, 1St Floor, Kajinajrul Islam Avenue, Kolkata-700157. [Pan: Aadcd1890P] Vs. Ito, Ward-14(1), Kolkata….……............…..........................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 09, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 15, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.11.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Confirmation Of Addition Of Rs.2,67,60,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Protective Basis In Respect Of The Loan Amount Received By The Assessee From One Of Its Director & His Relatives. 3. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year Under Consideration Declaring A Total

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

addition was duly made in substantive manner in the hands of three parties. They also paid tax on the same by opting for Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Necessary evidences have been filed in the paper book page No.32-62. I.T.A. No.34/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dev Darshan Designs Pvt. Ltd Therefore

Orbit Financial Capital, Mumbai vs. ACIT-19 (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 271/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) on 17/01/2017, which was I.T.A. No. 271/Mum/2024

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 5(1)Section 69C

dismissing the appeal of the appellant and considered the appeal as deemed to be withdrawn by misinterpreting the provisions of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme Act, 2020. 2 I.T.A. No. 271/Mum/2024 Orbit Financial Capital 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal-NFAC erred in dismissing the appeal ... filed before CIT(A)(A)-NFAC 17.01.2017 Hearing notice u/s. 250 was issued, giving the appellant an 31.12.2020 option to opt for Vivads Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 Hearing notice u/s 250 was issued, giving the appellant an 22.01.2021 option to opt for Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 The appellant filed

K J Somaiya and Sons Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4241/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalassessment Year :2015-16 K J Somaiya & Sons Private Limited, 45-47, Somaiya Bhavan, M.G Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaack-1894-K ---- Appellant Vs. Acit -2(2)(1),Mumbai Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. --- Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri P.D.Chougule, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance of depreciation in every year, the assessee chose to settle the dispute. Accordingly, the assessee settled the dispute in other years under Vivad Se Vishwas Act. In the current year, the assessee withdrew its claim for depreciation in the return of income filed in response to the notice issued

Gati Kintetsu Express Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income, Cirlce 14(1)(2)Tax, Mumbai

In the result, In the result, appeal for AY 2013-14 is allowed partly for 14 is allowed partly for statistical purposes, purposes, appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed, is partly allowed, appeal...

ITA 2833/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Respondent: Mr. Madhur Agrawal
Section 143(3)Section 250

During the pendency of the appeal, the Gati of the appeal, the Gati settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the taxes

Gati Kintetsu Express Private Limited, Maharashtra and Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai, Maharashtra and Mumbai

In the result, In the result, appeal for AY 2013-14 is allowed partly for 14 is allowed partly for statistical purposes, purposes, appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed, is partly allowed, appeal...

ITA 2832/MUM/2023[ASS YEAR 2016 - 2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Respondent: Mr. Madhur Agrawal
Section 143(3)Section 250

During the pendency of the appeal, the Gati of the appeal, the Gati settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the taxes

Gati Kintetsu Express Private Limited, Maharashtra and Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai, Maharashtra and Mumbai

In the result, In the result, appeal for AY 2013-14 is allowed partly for 14 is allowed partly for statistical purposes, purposes, appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed, is partly allowed, appeal...

ITA 2831/MUM/2023[ASS YEAR 2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Respondent: Mr. Madhur Agrawal
Section 143(3)Section 250

During the pendency of the appeal, the Gati of the appeal, the Gati settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the taxes

Gati Kintetsu Express Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, In the result, appeal for AY 2013-14 is allowed partly for 14 is allowed partly for statistical purposes, purposes, appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed, is partly allowed, appeal...

ITA 2830/MUM/2023[ASST YEAR 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Respondent: Mr. Madhur Agrawal
Section 143(3)Section 250

During the pendency of the appeal, the Gati of the appeal, the Gati settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the taxes

Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ltd, Maharashtra and Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai, Maharashtra and Mumbai

ITA 2829/MUM/2023[ASS YEAR 2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Respondent: Mr. Madhur Agrawal
Section 143(3)Section 250

going concern is taxable u/s 50B of the Act. During the pendency of the appeal, the Gati settled the issue under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the taxes thereon. Therefore, the allegation of the Ld. Assessing Officer that Gati Ltd. has not offered the said surplus income

Shine Star, Mumbai vs. ACIT-19(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 4742/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal: A.Y : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. SinghFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 271(1)(c)

that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the reasoning that the assessee has settled the dispute under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The learned AR submitted that the impugned assessment order has been passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income ... short ‘the Act’) and the dispute in this assessment year has not been settled by the assessee under Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. He submitted that assessee has, in fact, settled the dispute arising from the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act. Accordingly, the learned

Pragati Pre Fab India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 13 (1)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 2652/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 276Section 276C(2)Section 9

Against assessment order dated 28/03/2016, assessee preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority. During the pendency of first appeal, assessee opted for ‘Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme’ and filed declaration on 31/01/2021 under Direct tax VSVS Rules 2020. However, the said application / declaration was rejected by the department

Dalmia Bharat Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 26, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 5418/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5418/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 बनाम Dalmia Bharat Limited Acit 11Th Floor, Hansalaya Building Vs. Central Circle-26, 15, Barakhamba Road, Ara Centre, New Delhi. Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi. Pan No. Aajcs7366K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Counsel for the assessee furnished a letter dated 07.05.2024 stating that assessee wants to withdraw the appeal as the Assessee had opted under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme I.T.A.Nos.5418/Del/2017 and settled the taxes on the issues in appeal. The contents of the letter are as under: I.T.A.Nos.5418/Del/2017

Inderjeet Kaur Bhatia, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 49(1), New Delhi

ITA 2830/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Shivam Malik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 269SSection 271DSection 69

Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs. 5,36,00,000/- on account of purchase of immovable property and mistaking the application of Vivad se Vishwas scheme [VSVS] to the assessment proceedings instead of penal proceedings. 4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee ... assessee further argued that the ld. CIT(A) has mistakenly passed the order considering that the assessee has availed the facility of Vivad se Vishwas Scheme for the said demand raised in the assessment proceedings, whereas the assessee has not availed any such facility. 12. It was submitted that

ITO, WD. 1(2)(2), Race Course Circle, Vadodara vs. Neetaben Snehalkumar Patel, Race Course Circle, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal preferred by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 247/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 247/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15) िनधा"रण वष"

For Respondent: Shri Sunil Talati, A.R
Section 10(38)Section 68

also filed in that case. The said appeal was, however, dismissed as withdrawn for the reason that the assessee had availed benefit of ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020’ (VSV) and consequently a request was made for withdrawal of appeal. The other case of Mohit Hora (HUF) relied upon

Jcdecaux S.A., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is party allowed

ITA 2473/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. K. M. Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 270ASection 9(1)(vii)

reduce litigation and difficulty in retrieving documents for these years, the appeals for AY 2011-12 & A.Y. 2012-13 were settled under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme (VSV). Similar services were also rendered by the assessee in AY 2015-16 pursuant to General Support Agreement ("GSA') (effective from January

Macrotech Developers Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Range-7(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 4264/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sahil Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153CSection 250

passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 143(3) of the Act on the ground that the Assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme in this case, whereas the assessee never opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme in this case. 3. In fact, the Assessee during the pendency ... vide order dated 14.12.2021, dismissed the appeal of the assessee as dismissed as withdrawn on the ground that the assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. 4. Therefore, inference can be drawn that the Ld. Commissioner while passing the impugned order which is under consideration, may have taken into