“vsv scheme”

Settlement & AmnestyDTVSV 2020DTVSV 2020524 judgments

Judgments citing vsv scheme

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

ITA 489/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2012-13

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

expressed by various judicial authorities, with the sole intention of not furthering any litigation on this aspect, IBM India had settled its appeals under VsV scheme for the AY 2009- 10 to AY 2015-16, wherein tax liability of approximately Rs 83 crore was duly paid by IBM India ... VsV Scheme and the litigation pertaining to seven years was settled to end litigation and attain closure. 3.14 IBM India, on acceptance of the said receipts to tax in India, withdrew its pending appeals before the ITAT (Special Bench) and remitted the taxes due under the VsV scheme

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

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

ITA 487/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2014-15

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

Section 271

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

required to be deleted. Hence it is submitted that in case where the substantial addition has been made and the parties have opted for VSV Scheme and paid their taxes, the protective assessment is liable to be deleted since the same would tantamount to making double addition. Reference in this

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

17/01/2017, which was 3 I.T.A. No. 271/Mum/2024 Orbit Financial Capital subsequently transferred to the NFAC. The appellant opted for VSV scheme by filing Form No. 1 & 2 on 25/01/2021. 5. Form No. 3 was issued by the Designated authority on 01/09/2021. However, the appellant chose not to pursue this application

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

Mumbai against the assessment order dated 24.12.2019 under section 153C read with section 147 of the Act , has opted for VSV Scheme and paid the relevant taxes and Revenue Department issued Form no 3 and 5 which were taken into consideration the said Ld. CIT(A) who, vide order dated ... inference can be drawn that the Ld. Commissioner while passing the impugned order which is under consideration, may have taken into consideration availing the VSV Scheme in the case emanated from Assessment order dated 24.12.2019 u/s 153C read with section 147 of the Act. And therefore, the impugned order

Sunita Sarwankumar Saraf, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), NFAC

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

ITA 3253/MUM/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Aby T. Varkey: A.Y : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Dr. Koshore Dhule –CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69C

settle the above said disputes arising in the original assessment proceedings under the above said scheme. Accordingly, it filed Form-I under the VSV Scheme on 31-01-2021 and subsequently settled the disputes relating to the additions made in the original assessment proceedings by paying due taxes. The application ... r.w.s 263 of the Act making all the above said additions. The AO also did not give credit of taxes paid under VSV scheme. The assessee challenged the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the Act by filing appeal before ld CIT(A). The first

Oracle Farms LLP (Successor to Oracle Farms Pvt Ltd.), New Delhi vs. ACIT CC-16, New Delhi

ITA 2156/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 2156/Del/2019, (A.Y. 2012-13) M/S. Oracle Farms Llp Vs. Acit E-20, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, Central Circle – 16 New Delhi-110024 New Delhi Pan No.Aadf08737F Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Anil Kumar Jain, Advocate Revenue By Sh. Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 08/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09/04/2024 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 07.01.2019 Pertaining To A.Y. 2013-14. 2. Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Filed An Application Contending That The Dispute Between The Assessee & The Department Has Been Settled Under Vsv Scheme, Therefore, Sought Permission To 2 M/S Oracle Farms Llp Vs. Acit Withdraw The Present Appeal. Placing The Application & The Submission Of The Ld.Ar On Record, The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Dismissed As Withdrawn.

Counsel for the assessee filed an application contending that the dispute between the assessee and the department has been settled under VSV Scheme, therefore, sought permission to 2 M/s Oracle Farms LLP Vs. ACIT withdraw the present appeal. Placing the application and the submission of the Ld.AR on record

Sri Vishal Kumar Bhuwania, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Cir. 4(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 103/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 103/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Sri Vishal Kumar Bhuwania,………....…...….Appellant C/O. M/S. Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, C.R. Avenue, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700072 [Pan:Adopb0280C] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,… Respondent Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri S. Jhajharia, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: April 01, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: April 03, 2024 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Assessment Year is 2013-14. The ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed this appeal on the ground that the assessee has availed the benefit of VSV Scheme. 3 Sri Vishal Kumar Bhuwania 6. The stand of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the assessee has not availed the benefit

Jewel India Jewellers, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cen. Cir. 4(4), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1396/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115BSection 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

dismissing the appeal as withdrawn by ignoring the submissions filed by the assessee and observing that assessee has gone into VSV scheme. As a matter of fact the assessee has not opted for VSV scheme. In the second ground the assessee has challenged the order of Ld. CIT(A) upholding ... proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn on the wrong understanding of facts that the assessee has availed VSV scheme. 6. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that a search action was conducted on the assessee

Jewel India Jewellers, Kolkatqa vs. DCIT, Cen. Cir. 4(4), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1395/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115BSection 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

Omkar Singh Chauhan, Haryana vs. Pr, CIT, Faridabad

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

ITA 1116/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadomkar Singh Chauhan, Vs. Pr. Cit, C/O E-1/77, Lower Floor, Faridabad. Ymca Road, Sector 11, Faridabad – 121 004 (Haryana). (Pan : Akwpc2231M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dushyant Kumar Bhati, Ca Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Dushyant Kumar Bhati, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT DR

Section 263Section 5

That Ld. Pr.CIT has erred both in law and on facts in passing the impugned order u/s 263 as the assessee has opted the VSV Scheme, 2020 and the matter was finally closed on 25- 11-2021 and on the said date PCIT had issued the Form-5 of VSV ... case of Gopala Krishnan Rajkumar vs. PClT (supra). We find that the Hon'ble Court has been pleased to observe opting the VSV Scheme and finalizing thereof is nothing but the closure of disputes in respect of tax arrears which cannot be subsequently reopened by issuing notice under Section

Dreamz Vanijya (P)Ltd, Nagpur vs. ITO, Kolkata

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

ITA 522/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)

order then it would reveal that only one notice alleged to have been issued vide which it was enquired whether assessee is opting VSV Scheme 2020 or not. This notice was issued in January, 2021 when COVID pandemic was at its peak. 13. One Sh. Ashok Prasad has filed

Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

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

ITA 995/BANG/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2006-07 M/S. Texas Instrument (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 66/3, Bagmane Tech Park, C. V. Raman Circle – 7(1)(1), Nagar, S. O, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 093. Pan : Aaact 5445 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Ketan Ved, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Subramanian S, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 18.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Ketan Ved, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 260ASection 4(2)Section 40

erred in dismissing the appeal on the inaccurate assumption that the Appellant opted for the Vivad Page 2 of 5 Se Vishwas ('VSV') Scheme under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 ('the VSV Act'), in relation to such appeal. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in making ... before the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court under DTVSVA, 2020, vide application dated 29.12.2020. Copy of Form No.1 for settling the matter under the VSV scheme, 2020, was enclosed along with the written submissions filed before the CIT(A) [in Page 4 of 5 the present proceedings before

Ranjit Ramchandra Jagtap, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Pune

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

ITA 1317/PUN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

Section 143(3)Section 250

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “बी” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA

United Spirits Limited, Bangalore (Successor to Sw Finance Co Limited- Formerly Known As Shaw Wallace Breweries Limited), Bangalore vs. The JCIT Special Range 7, Bangalore

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3201/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S.(Accountat Member)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 250Section 35D

officer for verification. 18. We heard the parties and perused the material on record. We notice from the above extracted relevant clauses & clarifications of VSV Scheme it is clear that the if the assessee chooses to include the amount of tax related to such MAT credit in the amount

Great Eastern Energy Corporation Limited, Gurugram vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward-1(3)(2), International Taxation-1, Delhi

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

ITA 2446/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. K. M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

erred in passing an incorrect order on the incorrect assumption that the Appellant opted for dispute resolution mechanism under Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 ('VSV scheme') for TDS proceedings under section 201(1)/(1A) without appreciating that the Appellant opted for VSV scheme for normal assessment proceedings under section

Greenwoods Govt. Officers Welfare Society, Noida vs. DCIT Circle 52(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 609/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri S.D. Srivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 270A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL

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)

settled under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, the assessee would be eligible for immunity from penalty proceedings automatically as per the Direct Tax VSV Scheme, 2020. Hence, the penalty levied herein is liable to be deleted. Accordingly grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 4. In the result, the appeal

Laxmi Narayan Agarwal, Jaipur vs. PCIT, Jaipur-2, Income Tax Department

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 296/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT) a

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

PCIT on 26.03.2021, (APB 31-32). It is submitted that once the assessment order sought to be revised stood settled by under VSV Scheme which was enacted by the Parliament with the intention to reduce the disputes in respect to tax saviors and to bring down the tax litigations ... order is reviving the proceedings which have been settled under the scheme, being initiated after assessee’s suo-moto action of filing application under VSV Scheme, therefore, the proceedings u/s 263 are not in accordance with law. In this regard, reliance is placed on the decision