2020 (12) TMI 783 - HC - Income Tax

Rectification u/s 254 - respondent states that this Court in the present appeal cannot direct the Tribunal to expedite the disposal of the application filed by the appellant under Section 254(2) - HELD THAT - We are of the view that if the respondent s submission is accepted, it would defeat the cause of justice as this Court would not hear the appeal till appellant s application under Section 254(2) is decided and at the same time, it could issue no direction to the Tribunal to expedite the disposal of the said application. If the facts stated in the present petition are correct, then the appeal is liable to be allowed on the first question of law framed by the appellant in the present appeal. Consequently, as of now, admit the appeal on the following question - Whether the Tribunal erred in law in failing to adjudicate upon the admissibility and consider the additional evidence furnished by the appellant under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules? At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent submits that this Court cannot decide the issue No. 1 without seeing the record of the Tribunal. Since it is the case of the appellant that he wishes to avail the benefit of amnesty scheme i.e. Vivad Se Vishwas , which closes on 31st December, 2020, we direct the Registry of this Court to summon the record for assessment year 2011-12 by a special messenger today itself.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Failure of the Tribunal to decide on the application for additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules.
2. Failure of the Tribunal to decide on the appellant's application under Section 254(2).
3. Challenge to the impugned order by the appellant.
4. Request for expeditious disposal of the application under Section 254(2).
5. Jurisdiction of the Court to direct the Tribunal to expedite the disposal of the application.
6. Admissibility and consideration of additional evidence by the Tribunal under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules.
7. Benefit of amnesty scheme 'Vivad Se Vishwas' sought by the appellant.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The appellant challenged the order of the ITAT dated 28th February 2019 for AY 2011-12, citing errors in the Tribunal's failure to decide on the application for additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules. The appellant emphasized discrepancies between the impugned order and factual findings from previous assessments, alleging that the business activity had been revived during the relevant year. The appellant also expressed intent to avail the 'Vivad Se Vishwas' amnesty scheme.

2. The respondent argued that the appellant was attempting to challenge the tribunal's order while simultaneously filing an application under Section 254(2). The appellant's senior counsel had no objection to directing the Tribunal to expedite the Section 254(2) application. However, the respondent contended that the Court could not direct the Tribunal to expedite the application's disposal.

3. The Court acknowledged the need for justice and admitted the appeal based on the first question of law framed by the appellant regarding the Tribunal's failure to adjudicate on the admissibility of additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules. The respondent raised concerns about deciding the issue without reviewing the Tribunal's record.

4. Considering the appellant's desire to benefit from the 'Vivad Se Vishwas' scheme before its deadline, the Court directed the Registry to obtain the record of ITA No. 3613/Del/2015 for AY 2011-12 promptly. The matter was scheduled for further hearing on 18th December 2020 to address the issues raised comprehensively and ensure a just resolution in light of the pending applications and the appellant's request for amnesty.