2022 (1) TMI 1193 - AT - Income Tax

Benefit of 'Vivad Se Vishwas' Scheme - Both the quantum and the penalty appeals were treated as withdrawn having been settled under 'Vivad Se Vishwas' Scheme - However, qua the two appeals listed today, the common fact remains that in 2013-14 and 2014-15 assessment years, the quantum appeals were never settled in Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and hence have been incorrectly treated as withdrawn - HELD THAT - As in 2013-14 assessment year, the penalty appeal which has been settled in Vivad as Vishwas Scheme is instead erroneously shown to be pending and the quantum appeal which is pending is held to be withdrawn. Form No. 35 filed before the CIT(A) were specifically highlighted which were copy of Form No. 5 uploaded by the Pr. CIT, copy of withdrawal of penalty appeal filed by the assessee and copy of Form No. 35 (Pages 16-18) filed before the CIT(A). We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In the light of the facts as borne out from record which we have seen, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned orders and set aside the issues back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to pass the orders denovo in accordance with law considering the correct facts and after hearing the assessee. Said order was pronounced in the presence of parties via Webex.

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of correctness of separate orders passed by CIT(A) under the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15.

Analysis:
1. The appeals challenged the orders passed by the CIT(A) under the Income Tax Act for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15. Both parties acknowledged that the arguments in both appeals were similar. The grounds raised in one of the appeals highlighted errors in passing the order contrary to the provisions of the Act, dismissing the appeal incorrectly, and upholding actions without following proper procedures. Additionally, there were objections to the rejection of deduction claims and additions to the income based on incorrect assumptions and unreliable information.

2. The Appellant's representative argued that the assessee had sought settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for quantum appeals and penalties imposed under section 271(1)(b). While penalties were settled under the Scheme, the CIT(A) mistakenly treated the quantum appeal as withdrawn, leading to incorrect orders. The distinction between the two assessment years was clarified, emphasizing that the quantum appeals were never settled under the Scheme for both years.

3. The Appellant's representative referred to the record, highlighting discrepancies in the treatment of penalty and quantum appeals under the Scheme for the respective assessment years. The request was made to remand the issues back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits after hearing the assessee, supported by specific documents from the Paper Book.

4. After considering the submissions and the record, the Tribunal decided to set aside the impugned orders and remand the issues back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration in accordance with the law, ensuring correct facts are considered and the assessee is given a hearing. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, and the order was pronounced in the presence of the parties via Webex.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision focused on rectifying the errors in the orders passed by the CIT(A) for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15, emphasizing the need for a proper assessment based on accurate facts and compliance with legal procedures.