← 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

Ca (India) Technologies P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO RG 14(1)(2), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 2046/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Us Submitted That The Appellant Has Opted For Settlement Under The Provisions Of Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Dtvsv Act’). In This Regard, The Ld. Authorised Representative For The Appellant Placed On Record Order Of Full & Final Settlement Of Tax Arrears Under Section 5(2) Read With Section 6 Of The Dtvsv Act In Form 5 [Acknowledgement No. 347467521140322]. In View Of The Aforesaid, The Ld. Authorised Representative For The Appellant Requested For The Withdrawal Of The Present Appeal. The Learned Departmental Representative Did Not Have Any Objections To The Aforesaid Request.

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh MalpaniFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 5(2)Section 6

Authorised Representative for the Appellant appearing before us submitted that the Appellant has opted for settlement under the provisions of Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the DTVSV Act’). In this regard, the Ld. Authorised Representative for the Appellant placed on record order of full

Morgan Stanley Advantage Services P Ltd., Mumbai vs. CIT (Apeals), Nationa Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1083/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalmorgan Stanley Advantage Services Pvt. Ltd. Athena Building No.5, Sector-30, Mindspace, Goregaon (West), Mumbai-400090 Pan: Aaeca3400B ...... Appellant Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeals Centre, Delhi. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Sunil M. Lala Respondent By : Sh. Amol B. Kirtane Date Of Hearing : 20/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 27/06/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeals Centre (Nfac), Delhi. [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit(A)’] Vide Order Dated 11.12.2018 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Ground 1: Disallowance Of Expenditure Claimed Towards Employee Stock Option Scheme (Esop) Under Section 37(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act) Amounting To Rs 1,84,75,816. In This Regard, The Learned Cit(A)/ Learned Assessing Officer Has, On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Erred On The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil M. LalaFor Respondent: Sh. Amol B. Kirtane
Section 143(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 30Section 37(1)

Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre) on the ground that the appeal is infructuous since the Appellant has opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSV), In this regard, the learned CIT(A) has, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, erred on the following ... ground: (i) In erroneously concluding that the appeal by the Appellant filed against the CIT(A) Order is settled under the Direct tax Vivad se Vishwas Act 2020, and consequentially, erroneously dismissing the appeal by treating it as infructuous. Each of the grounds of appeal referred above is separate

K.G. Krishna, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore

ITA 312/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &
Section 153A

could not be filed in time. It is only when the auditor of the assessee was contemplating to avail the benefit of scheme “Vivad Se Vishwas, 2020”, enquired about the status of the appeals with the assessee, it was learnt that appeal orders were already passed and time limit

K.G. Krishna, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

ITA 311/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &
Section 153A

could not be filed in time. It is only when the auditor of the assessee was contemplating to avail the benefit of scheme “Vivad Se Vishwas, 2020”, enquired about the status of the appeals with the assessee, it was learnt that appeal orders were already passed and time limit

K.G. Krishna, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

ITA 310/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &
Section 153A

could not be filed in time. It is only when the auditor of the assessee was contemplating to avail the benefit of scheme “Vivad Se Vishwas, 2020”, enquired about the status of the appeals with the assessee, it was learnt that appeal orders were already passed and time limit

K.G. Krishna, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore

ITA 309/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &
Section 153A

could not be filed in time. It is only when the auditor of the assessee was contemplating to avail the benefit of scheme “Vivad Se Vishwas, 2020”, enquired about the status of the appeals with the assessee, it was learnt that appeal orders were already passed and time limit

K.G. Krishna, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore

ITA 308/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &
Section 153A

could not be filed in time. It is only when the auditor of the assessee was contemplating to avail the benefit of scheme “Vivad Se Vishwas, 2020”, enquired about the status of the appeals with the assessee, it was learnt that appeal orders were already passed and time limit

K. G. Krishna, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore

ITA 307/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &
Section 153A

could not be filed in time. It is only when the auditor of the assessee was contemplating to avail the benefit of scheme “Vivad Se Vishwas, 2020”, enquired about the status of the appeals with the assessee, it was learnt that appeal orders were already passed and time limit

Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cent Cir -1(2), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 93/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR
Section 14A

sake of brevity) by holding that the Appellant had opted to settle the dispute by filing an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Appellant submits that it had not filed any application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 in respect ... passed by the CIT(A) may be set-aside. While on the subject, the Appellant humbly submits that it has filed application under Vivad se Vishwas Act against appeal pending before the Hon'ble CIT(A) in response) to order passed u/s 272A of the Act leving the penalty

Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Central Cir-1(2), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 92/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR
Section 14A

sake of brevity) by holding that the Appellant had opted to settle the dispute by filing an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Appellant submits that it had not filed any application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 in respect ... passed by the CIT(A) may be set-aside. While on the subject, the Appellant humbly submits that it has filed application under Vivad se Vishwas Act against appeal pending before the Hon'ble CIT(A) in response) to order passed u/s 272A of the Act leving the penalty

Eldelweiss Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 4(1) (1), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 15/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR
Section 14A

sake of brevity) by holding that the Appellant had opted to settle the dispute by filing an application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Appellant submits that it had not filed any application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 in respect ... passed by the CIT(A) may be set-aside. While on the subject, the Appellant humbly submits that it has filed application under Vivad se Vishwas Act against appeal pending before the Hon'ble CIT(A) in response) to order passed u/s 272A of the Act leving the penalty

Bp India Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT ) 8(1), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 2215/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2022AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Amol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Samruddhi D Hande
Section 271(1)(c)Section 5(1)Section 5(2)Section 6

appearing before us submitted that the quantum appeal for the Assessment Year 2005-06 has been settled under the provisions of Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the DTVSV Act’). In this regard, the Ld. Authorised Representative for the Appellant placed on record (a) declaration

Shri Shikhar Hitendra Thakur, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle-4, Thane

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

ITA 1745/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleshri Shikhar Hitendra Thakur V. Acit – Circle -4 01, Station Road, Room No. 2, “A” Wing Virar (W)-401303 Ashar I.T. Park, Road No. 16Z Wagle Industrial Estate Pan: Ajipt7889B Ambika Nagar, Thane - 400604 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jasvant Pawar Department By : Shri Kishore Dhule

For Appellant: Shri Jasvant PawarFor Respondent: Shri Kishore Dhule
Section 5(1)

Assessee through its authorized representative filed a letter submitted as under: - “Ref.: Appeal No. ITA_1745/MUM/2018 Sub. : Withdrawal of Appeal pursuant to Vivad se Vishwas scheme Dear Sir, 2 Shri Shikhar Hitendra Thakur The assessee in above-referred appeal has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 and has been ... issued Form No.3 being Form for Certificate u/s.5(1) of the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act 2020 vide acknowledgement number 280513440040321, a copy of which is enclosed herewith for your kind perusal. Annexure ‘A’ In view of the above, your honour is requested to allow the assessee to withdraw

Iot Infrastructure & Energy Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 7631/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2022AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

hearing learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the assessee is withdrawing this appeal as it has settled the issue under Vivad Se Vishwas Act 2001. 3. We have heard learned Departmental Representative. In view of the fact narrated by learned AR, we allow the assessee to withdraw

Kodak India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT 14 (2)(1), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed as 3

ITA 7842/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri RaunakFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kamat
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 5(1)Section 5(2)Section 6

request for withdrawal of the appeal 2. having opted to settle the matter under the provisions of Direct Assessment Year: 2015-16 Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the DTVSV Act’). The Assessee has placed on record a certificate in Form 3 issued under Section

Chiron Behring Vaccines P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) RG 8(1), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 2705/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Harsh SangoiFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pinisetty
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 5(1)Section 5(2)Section 6

appearing before us submitted that the quantum appeal for the Assessment Year 2007-08 has been settled under the provisions of Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the DTVSV Act’). In this regard, the Ld. Authorised Representative for the Appellant placed on record (a) declaration

DCIT 8(1), Mumbai vs. B.P. India Services P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 3035/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3035/Mum/2012 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3440/Mum/2012 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4994/Mum/2014 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Dcit-8(1), M/S B. P. India Services 260A, 2Nd Floor, Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Technopolis Knowledge Vs. Road, Park, Mahakali Caves Mumbai-400 020 Road, Chakala, Andheri(E) Mumbai-400 093 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No. Aaccb2030Q (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलधथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Dr. Yogesh Kamat, Ld. Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Chandani Shah, Ld. Ar सुनवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.06.2022 घोर्णधकीतधरीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 01.06.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.03.2012 & 12.06.2014 Respectively Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-15, Mumbai For Ay 2007-08. 2

For Appellant: Dr. Yogesh Kamat, Ld. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Chandani Shah, Ld. AR

dated 30/05/2022 wherein it has been submitted that the assessee has already opted for settlement of dispute for the year under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (WS Scheme), 2020 and Form-5 has already been issued by the appropriate authority. Therefore, assessee wants for withdrawal of the appeals

Gajendra M. Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 15 (1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 6358/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Gajendra M. Mehta The Income Tax Officer, 161/163,Mahimtura Marg, 3Rd Ward 15(1)(1) R.No.219, 2Nd Floor, Tardeo Kumbharwada Lane, Vs. Mumbai-400 004 Road, Mumbai-400007 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afopm7187H

For Appellant: Shri Gajendra M. Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajit K. Shrivastava, CIT DR

time of hearing, assessee submitted a letter dated 26th of August 2021 stating that assessee has already opted to settle the dispute Under Vivad Se Vishwas scheme 2020 and form number 3 has already been issued. Therefore assessee requested for the drawer of the appeal. 03. The learned departmental representative

M/S. Console Components (India ) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, miscellaneous application is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 41/MUM/2022[2014-15 QUARTER 4]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022

vide order dated 30.07.2021, the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal on the short ground that the assessee has settled the matter under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, but as the matter of fact no such settlement is ultimately be arrived at. It is pointed out that the assessee applicant ... could not make payment of the along determine under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, within the prescribe time limit and accordingly the declaration filed by the applicant under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, shall be presumed never to have been made. 2. We have heard the rival contentions

Prakash Dugar, Mumbai vs. ITO 18 (2)(5), Mumbai

The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn subject to the observation recorded hereinabove

ITA 6440/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhprakash Dugar Vs. Ito-18(2)(5) Shop No. 3, Labh Niwas Earnest House, 95, Dr. A.M. Road, Nariman Point, Kalbadevi, Mumbai - 400021 Mumbai - 400002 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Akrpd4068N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : R.A. Dhyani Date Of Hearing 30.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30.05.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Am: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-29, Mumbai, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The A.O. U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y. 2015-16. 2. During The Course Of Appellate Proceedings Before Us The Assessee Has Filed Application For Withdrawal Of Appeal Vide Letter Dated 23.02.2022 Stating That He Opted For “Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme” & Also Enclosed Copies Of Form No. 1 To 4 Along With The Application.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: R.A. Dhyani
Section 143(3)

appellate proceedings before us the assessee has filed application for withdrawal of appeal vide letter dated 23.02.2022 stating that he opted for “Vivad se Vishwas Scheme” and also enclosed copies of Form No. 1 to 4 along with the application. ITA No.6440/Mum/2019 A.Y.2015-16 2 Prakash Dugar ... dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, subject to a rider that in the unlikely event of the matter not being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme the assessee shall have liberty to approach the Tribunal for restoration of his appeal within the time limit provided in the Act. 5. Resultantly