← 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

Mr. Sushila Devi Bokaria, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 153/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Sri.Kannan Narayanan, Addl.CIT-DR

learned Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee has already settled the issue involved in this appeal under the provisions of Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. In view of the above submission of the learned DR, we are of the view that no purpose would be served in keeping

Mangal Patekar, Mumbai vs. ACIT-26(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 2413/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mangal Santosh Patekar, Acit-26(2), 1305, Bld. No. 14, Bhakti Park, Vs. Bkc, Bandra (East), Near I Max Theatre, Walada (E), Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400037. Pan No. Ahqpp 1377 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr. T. Shankar, Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/02/2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. T. Shankar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 4

dated 13.12.2011 for the assessment year (AY) 2008-09. 2. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and furnished copy of Form-1 & Form-2 of VSV Scheme. The Ld. counsel at the outset has submitted that he does ... sides and perused the material on record. A reference has been made in sub-section (2) & (3) of section 4 of Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 for the purpose of withdrawal of appeal. In the light of the provision made in the scheme and after considering the material

Dipika Tanna, Mumbai vs. ITO - 33 (1)94), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 3241/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Tejas ShahFor Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 5(1)Section 5(2)

appeal, as the assessee has opted to settle the dispute relating to the penalty for the assessment year under consideration, under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The assessee has also filed copy of Form No.3 issued by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under section 5(1) Dipika Tanna ... no.3241/Mum./2018 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act") and also copy of Form-4 being intimation of payment under section 5(2) of the Act, which are taken on record. 3. Learned Departmental Representative does not oppose the prayer so made

Sulbha K. Amre, Mumbai vs. ITO - 27(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 357/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Venugopal C. Nair, CAFor Respondent: Sh. C.T. Mathews, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

protective basis. Substantive addition has been made in assessee’s case in AY 2013-14. The assessee has settled the dispute under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as ‘VSVS’) and has paid the tax as determined by the designated authority in Form No.3. The ld. Authorized Representative

Galleria Condominium Association, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

ITA 1053/DEL/2021[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 250Section 4(5)

application before the Hon’ble bench ITAT New Delhi. (v) That we filed a declaration undertaking under section 4(5) of Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act 2020 (3 of 2020), bearing Acknowledgement number 962998601301220 on 30.12.2020, in which our application got rejected. (vi) After that second wave of Covid

Galleria Condominium Association, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

ITA 1052/DEL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 250Section 4(5)

application before the Hon’ble bench ITAT New Delhi. (v) That we filed a declaration undertaking under section 4(5) of Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act 2020 (3 of 2020), bearing Acknowledgement number 962998601301220 on 30.12.2020, in which our application got rejected. (vi) After that second wave of Covid

Galleria Condominium Association, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(5), Gurgaon, Gurugram

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

ITA 1038/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 250Section 4(5)

application before the Hon’ble bench ITAT New Delhi. (v) That we filed a declaration undertaking under section 4(5) of Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act 2020 (3 of 2020), bearing Acknowledgement number 962998601301220 on 30.12.2020, in which our application got rejected. (vi) After that second wave of Covid

Mr. Santokumar Gograj Adukia, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-17, Mumbai

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

ITA 990/MUM/2021[202-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2022

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 990/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Mr. Santosh Kumar Gograj बिधम/ Pcit-17 Room No.120, 1St Floor, Adukia Vs. B-401 Twin Apartment, Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C- Marve Road, Opp. Marve 43, G Block, Bandra Kurla Nsg. Home,Malad- Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400064. Mumbai-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaapa7459F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Shailesh Bandi Revenue By: Shri A. K. Kardam (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/12/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 27.03.2021 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 17 Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Pcit)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2012- 13 In Which The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-17 Has Invoked The Provisions U/S 263 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Pr. C.I.T, Mumbai-17, Has Grossly Erred In Passing An Order U/S 263 Of The I.T Act, Without Providing An Opportunity Of Personal Hearing, Which Is Against The Principles Of Natural Justice & Is Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh BandiFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Kardam (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 69ASection 69C

r.w.s. 147 of the Act has been passed by virtue of order dated 30.11.2018. The assessee also avail the scheme of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) and received the certificate in Form no. 3 and Form no. 4. The said forms have been submitted before the AO as well

Sipriyan Joseph D'Souza, Thane vs. ITO, Ward - 3(4), Kalyan

In the result, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 3010/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

appeal and the assessee has also filed Form No. 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5, on the ground that the matter is settled under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020. 2. Learned Departmental Representative does not oppose the prayer so made by the assessee. 3. There is no dispute that once ... matter is resolved under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020, the related appeal is required to be withdrawn. 4. In view of the above position, as also bearing in mind entirety of the case, we deem it fit and proper to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. Assessment Year: 2015-16 Page

Sunsolar Renewable Energy Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-3(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed having been become infructuous

ITA 4171/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Sunsolar Renewable Dy. Commissioner Of Energy Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, 211, 21St Floor, Circle -3(3)(1), Maker Tower-F, Vs. Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai – 400 005 Aayakar Bhavan, Pan: Aadcr8964L M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B. Irani, D.R

appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, the Ld. D.R., at the outset, brought to our notice that the assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and has brought on record form No.3 issued by the revenue authorities. 3. In view of the matter, the present appeal

R P Diamonds Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 20(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 633/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2011-12

filed letter dated 30.09.2021 seeking withdrawal of 2 the appeal as the assessee has opted to settle the dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and has received the certificate issued by the designated authority in Form No. 3. 3. Learned Departmental Representative has no objection

Raj Kumar Jain, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-63(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 5351/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2015-16

seeking 2 withdrawal of the appeal as the assessee has opted for settling the dispute arising in the appeal under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. A copy of the order issued by the designated authority in form no. 5 has also been furnished before us. 3. Learned ... Representative and perused the materials on record, we find the dispute arising in the present appeal has been settled under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 with the issuance of order dated 16th September, 2021 in form no. 5 by the designated authority. In view of the aforesaid

Parivar Agri Business Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 19(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2063/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2010-11

dated 21st October, 2021 seeking 2 withdrawal of the appeal as the assessee has opted to settle the dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and has received the certificate issued by the designated authority in Form No. 3. 3. Learned Departmental Representative has no objection

Dinesh Arora & Sons (HUF), Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward - 1(2), Ghaziabad

ITA 1181/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1181/Del/2020 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Dinesh Arora & Sons (Huf) Ito 4, Kiran Enclave, G T Road, Vs. Ward 1(2) Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Ghaziabad Pan No. Aachd6634F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Counsel for Assessee through letter dated 10.02.2022 seeks permission to withdraw the appeal as the matter in issue has been settled in Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and form no. 5 has already been issued accepting the declaration filed by the assessee for full and final settlement of tax arrears

Rameshwar Dayal Sharma, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3742/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Narender Kumar Choudhry

Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Before us, assessee has moved an application wherein the assessee has stated that it has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas (VSV) 2020 and has filed the declaration (Form-1) and undertaking (Form-2) Scheme and department had issued Form-3. The assessee therefore seeks

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 5, New Delhi vs. Kelly Services India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 7818/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi08 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had opted for settling the dispute arising in these appeals under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and accepting assessee’s declarations, the designated authority has issued form no. 5. Thus, she submitted, all the appeals may be treated

Kelly Services India Pvt. Ltd., Gurugram vs. ACIT, Circle-14(2), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 7786/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi08 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had opted for settling the dispute arising in these appeals under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and accepting assessee’s declarations, the designated authority has issued form no. 5. Thus, she submitted, all the appeals may be treated

Sanjay Singhania (HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-32(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6303/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandraita No. 6303/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Sanjay Singhania (Huf), Vs Income Tax Officer, N-17, 2Nd Floor, Pal Building, Green Ward-32(4), Park Extension, New Delhi-110016 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaohs9164H Assessee By : Sh. Sanjay Singhania, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 08.02.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Singhania, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

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

Kelly Services India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 5, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 6090/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi08 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had opted for settling the dispute arising in these appeals under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and accepting assessee’s declarations, the designated authority has issued form no. 5. Thus, she submitted, all the appeals may be treated

M/S. Muzaffarnagar Dist. Coop. Bank Ltd., Muzaffarnagar vs. ACIT, Muzaffarnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1005/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1005/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 M/S Muzaffarnagar District Vs Acit, Cooperative Bank Ltd., Circle-1, C/O Anil Deep & Company, 41/85, Muzaffarnagar Sadar Bazar, Muzaffarnagar-251001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaam4327P Assessee By : Sh. Sanjay Malik, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Sarita Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 08.02.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Malik, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumar, CIT DR

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