Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2020 (10) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2020 (10) TMI 1157 - HC - Income Tax


Issues:
Challenging common order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for Assessment Years 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09 under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The appeals were admitted based on Substantial Questions of Law regarding the denial of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act to the assessee, who ceased to be a small scale industry after ten years. The Tribunal's decision was challenged on the grounds of denying the deduction despite satisfying conditions initially. The counsels for both parties were heard, where the respondent cited a Supreme Court case against the assessee's arguments.

The respondent argued that the questions raised were answered against the assessee by a Supreme Court decision. Consequently, the court had to rule against the assessee based on the precedent. However, the appellant expressed intent to avail the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, taking steps to file the necessary application, requesting appropriate directions for the appeal's disposal.

Considering subsequent developments, the court noted the enactment of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, offering a resolution for disputed taxes. The Act provided declarants with the option to settle tax disputes pending at various levels, offering immunity from penalties and offenses in certain cases.

The court directed the appellant to file the required form under the Act before a specified date, with the competent authority instructed to process the application promptly. The appeals were disposed of with the liberty for restoration if the decision on the declaration was unfavorable. The court left the Substantial Questions of Law open for future consideration, with no costs imposed on either party.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates