“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

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bilaspur vs. M/S Jayem Holding Pvt. Ltd., Bilaspur

In the result, appeal filed by the department in ITA no

ITA 93/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Meena, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 68

which was disputed by the assessee, has been offered to be settled under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme brought by the income Tax Department. The application of the Third Eye Vinimay was accepted by the department and filed was issued on 27.05.2002 by Principal CIT. Accordingly, Third Eye Vinimay ... also deposited an amount of Rs. 4,14,17,988/- in terms of its application for Vivad se Vishwas Scheme on 09.10.2021, which was duly acknowledged, considered and accepted by the department by issuing form No. 5 dated 27.05.2002. Copies of documents showing settlement of the addition challenged

Narender Singh Shekhawat, B-120, Acharya Vinoba Bhave Nagar, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Jaipur

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

ITA 451/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sumer Singh ShekhawatFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

against the order of the ITO Ward 3 (5), Jaipur Dated 29.10.2018 and after Ward in response to the Scheme of Department, Opted « VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME, 2020» having duly fulfilled get availed Form. 1 and Form 2 on 27.01.2021, Copies of the Same are furnished herewith on 23.02.2021 having

DCIT()-Indore, Indore vs. M/S Shree Santoshi Traders, Indore

ITA 174/IND/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, M/S. Shree Santoshi 3(1), Traders, बनाम/ Indore. Fh 298, Scheme No. 54, Vijay Nagar, Vs. Indore (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Abafm0791P Assessee By Shri S.S.Deshpande, Ca Revenue By Ms.Simran Bhullar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 21.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.10.2023

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

originally dismissed by order dated 20.01.2022 of ITAT, Indore on the ground that the dispute involved had been settled by assessee in Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 (“VSV”). Subsequently, the revenue filed M/A No. 20/Ind/2022 seeking re-call of ITAT’s order on the footing that the assessee had opted

ITO, Ward-1, Churu vs. Shri Mahesh Goyanka, Churu

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

ITA 357/JODH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur27 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Us. The Learned Counsel For The Assessee, Vide Email Letter Dated Nil Has Requested For Withdrawal Of The Appeal Filed By The Assessee & Stated That The Assessee Has Opted To Settle The Dispute Relating To The Tax Arrears For The Assessment Year Under Consideration Under The Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. A Certificate To This Effect Under Section 5(1) Of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 Has Also Been Filed.

Section 5(1)

stated that the assessee has opted to settle the dispute relating to the tax arrears for the assessment year under consideration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. A certificate to this effect under Section 5(1) of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 has also been filed

Everest Food Products Pvt Ltd(Formerly Known As S. Narendrakumar and Co.), Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax -51, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2482/MUM/2023[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2023

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 132Section 143(3)

dismissing the appeals on the reasoning that the assessee has opted to settle the disputes under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 2. The Ld A.R submitted that the assessing officer has passed two assessment orders in respect of these years. He submitted that the first set of orders

Everest Food Products Pvt Ltd (Formerly Known As S. Narendrakumar and Co.), Mumbai vs. CIT-51, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2481/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 132Section 143(3)

Everest Food Products Pvt Ltd (Formerly Known As S Narendrakumar and Co.), Mumbai vs. CIT-51, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2480/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 132Section 143(3)

Everest Food Products Pvt Ltd (Formerly Known As S. Narendrakumar and Co.), Mumbai vs. CIT-51, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2479/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 132Section 143(3)

Sanjay Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-33(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 128/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

Sanjay Singh vs. ACIT a copy of Form-5 issued by the competent authority settling the entire dispute under The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, wherein the tax portion has been settled. Once the disputed tax is settled under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, the assessee would be eligible

Bain & Company, Inc., Usa vs. DCIT, Int.Taxation, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1620/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vii)

years 2011-12 to 2014-15, assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18 have been settled by the assessee under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, which shows tacit acceptability of the additions as FIS/FTS by the assessee. Thus, in the aforesaid premises, the Assessing Officer brought both ... Assessing Officer had observed that in respect of similar additions made in earlier assessment year, the assessee had settled the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, thereby tacitly accepting the additions. 21. In our view, the aforesaid observations of the Assessing Officer is not, at all, relevant

Sibasankar Sahu, - Deogarh vs. PCIT, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 217/CTK/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.217/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Sibasankar Sahu, Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur Arnapurna Store, At: Bania Sahi, Po/Ps: Deogarh Dist-Deogarh-768108 Pan No. :Apeps 1706 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, Dated 18.03.2022, Passed In Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2021-22/1041011837(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 199 Days. It Was The Submission That The Delay Was On Account Of Medical Treatment Of The Assessee’S Father & Assessee’S Wife. It Was The Submission That The Assessee Is An Individual Engaged In Trading Of Potatoes, Onion & Garlic In The Remote Area Of The District Of Deogarh, Odisha. It Was The Submission That The Assessee Was Not Well- Versed In Taxation Issues & On Account Of The Medical Treatment Of The 2 Assessee’S Father As Also The Assessee’S Wife, The Assessee Could Not File

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT-DR

Section 144Section 144ASection 263Section 44A

representing the sales. It was the submission that the assessee had filed first appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and in the meantime Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 had been introduced and the assessee opted for the said scheme. It was the submission that Form No.5 under the Vivad Se

Inmarsat Solutions Bv, Maharashtra vs. ACIT (International Taxation) Circle 2(1)(1)-Delhi, Delhi

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

ITA 1717/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Sathe, &

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

Supreme CourtIt is also noteworthy that Asia Satellite withdrew from the appeal in Hon'ble Supreme court under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. 9. The assessee has also placed its reliance on the favourable judgement of Mumbai ITAT in the case of its group entity Inmarsat Global Limited ... Supreme CourtIt is also noteworthy that Asia Satellite withdrew from the appeal in Hon'ble Supreme court under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Hence, it is learnt that the assessee's claim, in light of the above judicial pronouncements, was very much in the knowledge

Pankaj D Dube, Nagpur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur

ITA 114/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR

Section 263

114/NAG./2019 2. During the course of hearing, it is noticed that the assessee had opted to settle the disputed tax amount under VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME, 2020 and the department has issued Form No.5 which read as under : 3. In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3, Nagpur vs. M/S Cytec India Specialty Chemicals and Materials Pvt .Ltd, Nagpur

Appeal is dismissed in above terms subject to all just exceptions

ITA 87/NAG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Mayur Kisnadwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

having settled all the disputed taxes / demands; pertaining to the impugned assessment year 2012-13, under the provisions of the Direct Tax ‘Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020’. The Revenue could hardly dispute correctness thereof during the course 2 ITA.No.87/Nag./2020 ACIT vs. M/s. Cytec India Specialty Chemicals and Materials

Mohan Lal Mewara, Bhilwara vs. ITO, Ward-5, Bhilwara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 182/JODH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur19 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR

outset, it was brought to the notice of bench by the ld. DR that the assessee has filed application under the “Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act 2020” and has already submitted Form 1 & 2 and Form 5 have been issued by the designated authority. 3. Keeping in view

Jt CIT (OSD), CC-3(1), Mumbai vs. Vallabhbhai Parsottambhai Surani, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 498/MUM/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blejt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. Vallabhbhai Parsottambhai Surani Central Circle – 3(1) 1, Sundaram Bunglow Room No. 1924, 19Th Floor Lambe Hanuman Road Air India Building, Nariman Point Opp. Saiffe Society Mumbai – 400 021 Gujrat - 395006 Pan: Ajyps2262F (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.164/Mum/2021 [Arising Out Of Ita No. 498/Mum/2021 (A.Y: 2007-08)] Vallabhbhai Parsottambhai Surani V. Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) 1, Sundaram Bunglow Central Circle – 3(1) Room No. 1924, 19Th Floor Lambe Hanuman Road Air India Building, Nariman Point Opp. Saiffe Society Mumbai – 400 021 Gujrat - 395006 Pan: Ajyps2262F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Bharat Kumar Department Represented By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 153A

Further Ld. CIT(A) observed in his order that addition on account of cash deposited of ₹.4.38 Crores, Sanika has paid tax in Vivad se Vishwas scheme, Accordingly, he deleted the addition in the hands of assessee. However, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed legal grounds raised before him. 9. Aggrieved with ... Crores in Sanika bank statement, Ld. CIT(A) observed that Sanika has declared the same and paid the due tax under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. 12. Now legal question before us that substantive order of Shri Bhupendra Surani was quashed by the ITAT on legal ground vide order in ITA.No

Piyush Impex Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 20(4), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed and the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 4130/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11 Piyush Impex P. Ltd., Ito, Ward-20(4), New Delhi 110002 1224/5, 1St Floor, Bank Street, Karol Bagh, New Delhi 110005 Vs. Pan Aaccp 1691 B (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : None For Revenue: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.09.2023 Order Per Chandra Mohan Garg, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed Against The Order Of Cit(A)-7, Delhi Order Dated 07.03.2019 For Ay 2010-11. 2. During The Course Of Hearing, At The Very Outset, The Assessee Has Opted For Settlement Of The Disputed Tax Amount Under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 & The Department Also Issued Form No.5 Dated 13.12.2021, Which Is Placed On Record. 3. In View Of The Above & In Absence Of Any Objection From The Side Of The Ld. D.R, The Request Of The Assessee For Withdrawal Of The Appeal Is Allowed & The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Dismissed As Withdrawn. Order Pronounced In The Open Court At The Time Of Hearing I.E., On 27.04.2023. [Girish Agrawal] [Chandra Mohan Garg]Delhi, Dated 14Th September, 2023 Nv/-

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

During the course of hearing, at the very outset, the assessee has opted for settlement of the disputed tax amount under VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME, 2020 and the Department also issued Form No.5 dated 13.12.2021, which is placed on record. 3. In view of the above and in absence

Anju Rani Gupta, Noida vs. ACIT Circle-2, Moradabad

ITA 7120/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmasmt. Anju Rani Gupta, Vs. Acit, C-30, Sector 19, Noida, Circle-Ii, Uttar Pardesh Moradabad Pan : Afnpg9818A` (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 250(6)Section 4Section 5

record. An application has been filed, for withdrawal of the appeal by the assessee, in furtherance of settlement arrived under The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (The Act of 2020). 2 3. On behalf of the appellant, from Form 5 under the Act of 2020 has been placed

Anand Infracon, Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed regarding our observations above

ITA 100/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.100/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Anand Infracon 502, Dhebar Arcade, Near Kundan Palace, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aatfm4011A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1 (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 4(7)

VSVT and the same had been accepted by the Pr. CIT vide his order passed u/s.5(2) r.w.s. 6 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (3 of 2020) and “Form- 7 Anand Infracon Vs. Pr. CIT, Raipur-1 5” was issued; therefore, the Pr. CIT had grossly ... VSVT, and the Pr. CIT had accepted the same vide his order passed u/s.5(2) r.w.s. 6 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (3 of 2020) and issued a certificate to the assessee in “Form-5”; therefore, the Pr. CIT had, based on misconceived facts, assumed jurisdiction

Shri Ravi Chandy, Kochi vs. The ACIT, Non-Corporate Circle 1(1), Kochi

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 792/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Athul M.V., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148(1)Section 54F

property. The assessee carried the matter in appeal. However, before the same could be disposed of, he settled his dispute under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DSV Act), paying the disputed tax at Rs.7,15,410. The ld. CIT(A), vide order dated 12.3.2021 (Ann. Ravi Chandy ... appeal raised before the first appellate authority. It, treating the appeal as withdrawn, fails to consider that while the assessee opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme on 19.6.2020, paying tax on 05.3.2021 on its acceptance, the instant proceedings were initiated only at the instance of the Revenue vide notice u/s.148