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 - 2021 (3) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2021 (3) TMI 1073 - HC - Income Tax


Issues:
1. Quashing of the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)
2. Rejection of the application under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020
3. Non-compliance with Section 249(4)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
4. Interpretation of conditions precedent under Section 249(a) of the Act
5. Restoration of appeal and re-consideration of the application

Analysis:

1. The petitioner sought the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated 29.01.2021 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner's appeal was dismissed due to non-compliance with the requirement under Section 249(4)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as he failed to pay the tax due on the income returned.

2. Additionally, the petitioner requested the quashing of an endorsement rejecting his application under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. Despite asserting that he had paid the tax due, his application was rejected for non-compliance with the deposit of tax as required by Section 249(4)(a) of the Act.

3. The petitioner argued that he was willing to pay the tax due under Section 249(4)(a) within a reasonable time, citing a precedent where the Division Bench allowed an assessee to pay the admitted amounts before the authority, directing the Commissioner of Appeals to consider the appeals on their merits.

4. The Court considered the petitioner's contentions and the conditions precedent under Section 249(a) of the Act. Noting the rejection of the petitioner's application under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme due to non-compliance with the deposit of tax, the Court decided to permit the petitioner to pay the remaining dues within four weeks. Consequently, the order quashing the appeal and the rejection of the application were set aside for re-consideration.

5. The Court emphasized that if the petitioner failed to make the payment within the stipulated time, the benefits of the restoration of the appeal and re-consideration by the authority would be revoked. The respondent was instructed to process the petitioner's application afresh in light of the restored appeal, and any technical difficulties in reconsideration were to be addressed by following the necessary procedures.

This judgment highlights the importance of compliance with statutory requirements, the discretion of the Court in allowing payments under specific schemes, and the consequences of non-compliance with payment deadlines in tax matters.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates