9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1089X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts 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. - WRIT PETITION NO. 3312 OF 2021 ALONGWITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3332, 3299, 3365, 2358, 2360, 3270, 3174 OF 2021 - - - Dated:- 15-12-2021 - K.R. SHRIRAM AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ. Mr. P.S. Jetly, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Sameer G. Dalal i/b Ms. Monika Dokhale Walve for Petitioner. Mr. Akhileshwar S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the Legal Heir Status could not be a valid reason for rejecting the declarations. If Revenue accept the declarations, in our view, it would not amount to certifying the entitlement of petitioner to the estate of deceased. Petitioner, who claims to be the legal heir of deceased Kalyanji Bhagat, only wants to put end to all the appeals which are pending relating to the assessment of late Kalyanji Bhagat. Mr. Sharma also agreed that Revenue accepting the declarations filed by petitioner also cannot be useful to petitioner to claim entitlement to the estate of late Kalyanji Bhagat. Therefore, the rejection on this ground is not correct. That leaves the second ground to be considered. 8. First of all, the authority who reviews or considers the declarations under the DTVSV Act is not empowered to decide the appeals which have been filed before the ITAT on behalf of deceased Kalyanji Bhagat. The said officer cannot adjudicate on the maintainability of the appeals and state that the appeals have been filed beyond time. It is petitioner s case in these appeals that it is filed within time and at the relevant time the ITAT may decide it as it deems fit. 9. Mr. Jetly submitted tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to why they could not participate in the proceedings earlier and the orders impugned in these appeals have been set aside and the matters have been remanded for denovo consideration to the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals). Mr.Jetly therefore submitted that the contention of respondent that the appeals were filed beyond time is not correct. 13. It is petitioner s case that the legal heirs of the deceased Kalyanji Bhagat, by Power of Attorney dated 10th November, 1993, appointed Suresh Bhagat son of deceased Kalyanji Bhagat as Constituted Attorney and it was Suresh Bhagat who was pursuing all the appeals and proceedings arising from the assessments against the deceased Kalyanji Bhagat. On 13th June, 2008 Suresh Bhagat died and as he was the only person who was conversant with the facts and pending proceedings and as his name was represented as legal representative of deceased Kalyanji Bhagat in all the proceedings, revenue authority did not entertain any other legal heirs of deceased Kalyanji Bhagat because none of the legal heirs received any communication from the revenue. It is also alleged that sudden death of Suresh Bhagat created a vacuum and the other legal heirs of Kal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at fixed hearing before him on 25th January, 2019. In the course of hearing it was deemed proper and in the interest of justice to constitute a task force to determine the nature and break up of demands due as the matter was about 30 years old and even the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax had difficulty to determine the correct tax liability of the deceased Kalyanji Bhagat. But before the matter could be decided by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Range 21 was abolished and thereafter merged with Range 22 and thereafter the Head of Range 22 was transferred. In the absence of Range Head at Range 22 it is stated that petitioner had difficulty in coordinating with various offices of the department and petitioner was regularly co-ordinating with Range 22. It is petitioner s case that lot of time was spent or lost in co-ordinating with the various department of Revenue to procure documents/details including certified copies of the appellate orders which were required to file the appeals and proceed further after ascertaining the correct liability of the deceased Kalyanji Bhagat. Mr. Jetly submitted that even though in 2017 Tanuja Bhagat, daughter of petitioner had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct. 21. 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. 22. All the petitions therefore has to be allowed, and are hereby allowed, in terms of prayer clause (a) and (b) which reads as under : (a) that this Honourable Court be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, quash and set aside the order of rejection dated 9th April 2021 (Exhibit H ) passed by Respondent No.2 on the application filed by the Petitioner before him under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020; (b) that this Honourable Court be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directing Respondent Nos.1 2 to verify the declaratio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
