2021 (7) TMI 1267 - HC - Income Tax

Condonation of delay - Rejection of Declaration filed under the scheme called Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme - Revision / Appeal filed by the concerned Petitioner was time barred or was not valid - HELD THAT - No shadow of doubt that appeal could be said to be pending, even if the delay occurred in filing the same was not condoned and even if it was allegedly irregular or incompetent. In the instant case therefore also, the Respondent could not have rejected the Declaration Form of the Petitioner filed under the said Act merely on the ground that the Appeal was not valid or competent, as the delay occurred in filing the Appeal was not condoned by the Appellate Authority. In the opinion of the Court, the Respondent had to only take into consideration, as to whether, the Petitioner had filed an Appeal, and the same was pending on the specified date i.e. 31.1.2020. It was not for the Respondent to decide, as to whether, such Appeal was irregular or incompetent or invalid in the eye of law. The impugned communication dated 22.2.2021, displayed on the Portal of the Department, rejecting the Declaration filed by the Petitioner under the said Act, deserves to be quashed and set aside, and is accordingly quashed and set aside.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to rejection of Declaration under Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner filed a petition challenging the rejection of the Declaration under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, against the communication dated 22.2.2021.
2. The petitioner, engaged in pesticide trading, filed an income tax return for the FY 2012-13, declaring NIL income for the AY 2013-14. The assessment was framed under Section 143(3) of the IT Act, leading to an appeal by the petitioner.
3. The petitioner opted for the Vivad se Vishwas Act to settle the dispute pending before the Appellate Authority as of 31.1.2020. The Declaration was rejected citing the delay in filing the appeal and lack of information on condonation of delay.
4. The petitioner argued that being an appellant under the Act, the rejection based on delay without condonation was improper, citing relevant legal precedents.
5. The respondent contended that without condonation of delay, the appeal could not be considered valid, thus rejecting the Declaration was justified.
6. The Court examined the definition of an 'Appellant' under the Act and the 'specified date' criteria, noting the pending appeal and the delay issue.
7. Referring to legal interpretations, the Court emphasized that an appeal can be pending even if irregular or incompetent, as long as it is filed and pending on the specified date.
8. Consequently, the Court quashed the rejection of the Declaration, directing acceptance if found otherwise valid for the assessment year in question.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the legal arguments, statutory provisions, and judicial interpretations leading to the decision to quash the rejection of the Declaration under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020.