9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 706 - HC - Income TaxBenefit of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (' VVS Scheme') - Substantial Questions of Law framed for consideration on account of certain subsequent developments - HELD THAT - As assessee has already availed the benefit under the Act, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this appeal pending. At the same time, safeguarding the interest of the assessee in the event the order to be passed by the Department under the Act is not in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of on the ground that the assessee has already filed a declaration and the Department shall process the application at the earliest in accordance with the said Act and communicate the decision to the assessee at the earliest. As observed, the assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall entertain the prayer without insisting upon any application to be filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appeal.
Issues:
1. Appeal filed by Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 2. Substantial Questions of Law raised in the appeal: a. Tribunal setting aside Assessing Officer's order for reexamination. b. Tribunal remitting the issue back to Assessing Officer regarding the role of the Assessee in promoting the Company. c. Tribunal's finding being considered perverse. Analysis: 1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue challenging the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the Assessment Year 2014-15 under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal had set aside the Assessing Officer's order for reexamination, prompting the Revenue to question the validity of this decision. 2. The Substantial Questions of Law raised by the Revenue included the Tribunal's decision to remit the issue back to the Assessing Officer regarding the role of the Assessee in promoting the Company. The Tribunal referred to previous cases where the onus had been shifted to the Revenue to establish certain aspects, which the Assessing Officer had already examined. This raised concerns about the Tribunal's reasoning and the need for further clarification. 3. The Tribunal's finding was also challenged by the Revenue as being perverse. The Revenue argued that the Tribunal's decision contradicted established principles regarding the burden of proof in tax matters. This issue highlighted the disagreement between the Revenue and the Tribunal on the application of legal principles in the case. 4. However, due to subsequent developments related to the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, the Court found it unnecessary to decide on the Substantial Questions of Law. The Act provided a mechanism for resolving tax disputes, allowing taxpayers to end pending disputes at various levels. The Court noted that the Assessee had already filed a declaration under the Act, which would resolve the tax dispute. 5. Given that the Assessee had availed the benefits under the Act, the Court decided to dispose of the appeal. The Court emphasized the need to safeguard the Assessee's interests in case the Department's decision under the Act was not favorable. The Assessee was granted liberty to restore the appeal if needed, without requiring a formal application for condonation of delay. 6. In conclusion, the Tax Case Appeal was disposed of with the Assessee having already filed a declaration under the Act. The Court left the Substantial Questions of Law open for future consideration, with no costs imposed on either party.
|
