2021 (12) TMI 1089 - HC - Income Tax

Petition under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (the DTVSV Act) - time limit for filing the appeal - appeals which have been filed before the ITAT on behalf of deceased Kalyanji Bhaga - HELD THAT - Revenue is not denying the fact that the task force was created on two occasions and notwithstanding the appointment of task force, petitioner s were not able to get documents on time because of various organisational changes in the department. In the reply it is stated that in the absence of any material or documents in the Writ Petition, no credence could be given to the averment that the Task Force apparently constituted in the course of recovery proceedings appointed by Respondent No.2 could not provide a copy of the order passed by CIT (A) in September, 2011. Certainly, if only the affiant had gone through the files, he would have noted the notings in the file and he could have filed copy of the notings or the order sheets in the file, if according to him petitioner s averment in the petition was not correct. Respondents cannot simply skirt their responsibility by putting onus on petitioner to provide some documents constituting the task force. Therefore, from the facts as narrated above, we find that the time for filing the appeals against the order of CIT (A) had not expired as on the date of filing the declaration. The rejection of the declaration by petitioner under the DTVSV Act is not correct. We hope the authorities will keep in mind the objective of the DTVSV Act, which is the Act to provide for resolution of disputed tax and for matters concluded there with or incidental thereto. Here is the legal heir who wants to put an end or wants of closure to all the disputes between the deceased Kalyanji Bhagat who was his father and the tax authorities. We fail to understand why Revenue is rejecting these declarations without properly considering the facts and circumstances of the case.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Rejection of declaration under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DTVSV Act).
2. Legal heir status and locus standi of the petitioner.
3. Timeliness of filing the appeal.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Rejection of declaration under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DTVSV Act):
The petitioner challenged the authority's decision to reject the declaration filed under the DTVSV Act for multiple assessment years. The rejection was based on two grounds: lack of clarity on the legal heir status and the appeal being filed beyond the permissible time limit. The court found that the rejection on the ground of legal heir status was not valid, as the acceptance of the declarations would not certify the petitioner's entitlement to the estate of the deceased. Therefore, the rejection on this ground was incorrect.

2. Legal heir status and locus standi of the petitioner:
The petitioner claimed to be the son and legal heir of the deceased Kalyanji Bhagat, who left behind several legal heirs. Initially, Suresh Bhagat, another legal heir, handled the tax affairs but passed away in 2008, leaving a vacuum. The petitioner then took over and filed the declarations under the DTVSV Act. The court concurred that the legal heir status should not be a reason for rejecting the declarations, as it does not affect the petitioner's ability to resolve the tax disputes.

3. Timeliness of filing the appeal:
The court examined whether the appeals were filed within the permissible time frame. The petitioner argued that the orders were communicated only on 17th December 2020, and the appeals were filed within the 60-day limit. The respondent contended that the orders were available since 2017. The court noted that the petitioner faced difficulties in obtaining the necessary documents due to organizational changes within the revenue department. The court accepted the petitioner's explanation and found that the appeal was filed within the required time frame.

Conclusion:
The court allowed the petitions, quashing the rejection order dated 9th April 2021, and directed the respondents to verify the declarations filed by the petitioner and issue Form No.3 determining the tax payable. The court emphasized that this order could not be used by the petitioner in any disputes regarding the estate of the deceased Kalyanji Bhagat. The petitions were disposed of accordingly.