“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

Thyagarajan Arunkumar, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 690/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

also the counsel for Shri T Rajkumar informed the bench that Shri T Rajkumar has settled the matter relating to Capital gains under Vivad Se Vishwas Act. ITA Nos.688 to 690/Bang/2019 Sri Thyagarajan Arun Kumar, Bangalore Page 3 of 4 6. We heard the Ld. D.R. and perused the record

Thyagarajan Arunkumar, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 689/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Sri Thyagarajan Arun Kumar, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 688/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Alstom Holdings, France vs. DCIT(International Taxation), Circle-1(1)(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 2560/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Alstom Holdings, Vs Dcit, 48, Rue Albert Dhalenne, Circle 1(1), 93482, Saint-Quen Cedex, International Taxation, France. New Delhi. Pan: Aaica8751F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.02.2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Of The Ao U/S 143(3)/147 R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The It Act, 1961, Relating To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Time Of Hearing. However, Application Has Been Filed By The Assessee Seeking Withdrawal Of The Appeal On The Ground 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. The Assessee Has Also Obtained Form No.3. It Is Accordingly Requested In The Application That This Appeal May Be Allowed To Be Withdrawn.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

ground 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. The assessee has also obtained Form No.3. It is accordingly requested in the application that this appeal may be allowed

Sri. H.S. Ningaiah, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 34/BANG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Sri.V.Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Gopinath C H, CIT-DR

dated 01.02.2022, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that the assessee has availed dispute resolution scheme under the provisions of Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and prayed that the appeal may be treated as withdrawn. In view of the letter furnished by the learned Counsel

Mahabala Devadiga, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-16(1), Newdelhi

The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1737/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Mahabala Devadiga Ito F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Vs Ward – 16 (1) New Delhi -110085 New Delhi Pan No. Acipd6230H (Appellant) (Respondent)

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

Orient Clothing (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-19(1), New Delhi

The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 7086/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Orient Clothing (P) Ltd. Acit 1E/15, Jhandewalan Vs Circle – 19 (1) Extension, New Delhi New Delhi-110055 Pan No. Aaaco1779K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Vide letter dated 31.12.2022 the assessee sought permission to withdraw the appeal as the dispute has been settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 3. Noting the contents of the application the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 4. Decision announced in the open court in the presence of both

Sunil Kumar Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-34(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2991/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Amit Shukla

Assessment Year 2014-15. 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

Sarju Piyari Srivastava, Noida vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1975/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1975/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Sarju Piyari Srivastava, Vs Acit, E-82, Sector-52, Circle-3, Noida-201301 Noida-201301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afcps4238M Assessee By : Sh. K. C. Singhal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sandeep Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.02.2022

For Appellant: Sh. K. C. Singhal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Kumar, 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

DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Indian Oil Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals as well as cross objection are dismissed as withdrawn – subject to the observation above

ITA 6029/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.6029/Mum/2016 & 5978/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09) Dcit-14(2)(1) बिधम/ Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. 432, 4Th Floor, Aayakar G-9, Ali Yavar Jung Marg, Vs. Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 6024/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit-10(1) G-9, Ali Yavar Jung Marg, Room No.432, Aayakar Vs. Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051. Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. C. O No.30/Mum/2018 Arising Out Of Ita. No. 6029/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit-14(2)(1) 4Th G-9, Ali Yavar Jung Marg, 432, Floor, Aayakar Vs. Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051. Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaci1681G (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Ajay Chandra (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Rushabh Barbhaya सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/02/2022

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh BarbhayaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (DR)

appeals were called out for hearing, the ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that he has filed the necessary declaration under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) and is awaiting for final resolution of the matter under the said scheme. He submitted that upon completion ... right for revival of the appeals are protected, in the event of, for some unfortunate reason, the matter being not settled under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. 3. The Ld. DR also did not object to course so suggested. 4. In view of the above, we dismiss the appeals

Deevin Seismic Systems Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Faridabad

The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 2125/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi01 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deevin Seismic Systems Ito Private Limited Vs Ward- 1 (1) C/O. M/S. B. B. Mathur & Faridabad Company 3/13-B, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi -110002 Pan No. Aaccd8996P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Vide letter dated 16.12.2021 the assessee sought permission to withdraw the appeal as the dispute has been settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 3. Noting the contents of the application the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 4. Decision announced in the open court in the presence of both

ACIT, Noida vs. M/S. Dnata International Pvt. Ltd., Noida

In the result, the captioned appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 143/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kulbharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.143/Del/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, SrFor Respondent: 31.01.2022

that the designated authority has already granted certificate electronically to the declarant assessee admitting request of the assessee for settlement of dispute under ‘Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020’ (VSV) read with rules framed thereunder. The Ld. Counsel accordingly submitted that he does not seek to defend the said appeal owing

ACIT, Circle- 54(1), New Delhi vs. Standing Conference of Public Enterprises, New Delhi

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

ITA 4930/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Delhi28 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Bleassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Aashish Sachdeva, CA

submitted that 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. He further submitted that Form-5 dated 12.10.2021 has been issued by the Pr. CIT-12, New Delhi. Therefore, he requested for dismissal

ACIT, Circle- 54(1), New Delhi vs. Standing Conference of Public Enterprises, New Delhi

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

ITA 4929/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi28 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Bleassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Aashish Sachdeva, CA

submitted that 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. He further submitted that Form-4 has been issued. Therefore, he requested for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeal. 3. Learned Senior

ACIT, Circle- 54(1), New Delhi vs. Standing Conference of Public Enterprises, New Delhi

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

ITA 4928/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi28 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Bleassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Aashish Sachdeva, CA

Shailly Luthra, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-38(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 3078/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi28 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Bleassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

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 and had paid the tax arrears amounting to Rs. 690770/- for full and final settlement of tax and accordingly, the Form

Kapil Gupta (HUF), Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward-48(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2048/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi28 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Bleassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Puneet Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

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. He further submitted that the assessee has filed Form 4 under VSVS, 2020 Act and is waiting for the issue of a Certificate

ACIT, Circle- 4(2), New Delhi vs. Bharti Telemedia Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1350/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1350/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Acit, Vs Bharti Telemedia Ltd., Circle-4(2), Bharti Crescent 1, Nelson Mandela New Delhi-110002 Road, Vasant Kunj, Phase-Ii, New Delhi-110070 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcb0147R Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Satpal Gulati, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.01.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi vs. Power Grid Corp. of India Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 4683/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi28 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Bleassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Aashish Sachdeva, CA

submitted that 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. He further submitted that Form-5 dated 27.10.2021 has been issued by the Pr. CIT-07, New Delhi. Therefore, he requested for dismissal

Jagdish Prasad Jhawar HUF, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(3), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1408/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1408/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Jagdish Prasad Jhawar Huf, Vs Income Tax Officer, 191, Mig Housing Board Colony, Ward-1(3), Sector-10, Faridabad-121006 Faridabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabhj7519J Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Kumar Singhal, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.01.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Kumar Singhal, 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 5 have been issued by the designated authority. 3. Keeping in view