9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limitation for filing a revision in terms of the aforesaid thus travelled beyond the specified date of 31 January 2020. In our considered opinion, once the respondents had taken the principled position that the VSV Act would apply even in those matters where the limitation period for filing of appeals had not expired on the specified date, there can be no valid justification to either countenance or draw a distinction between an appeal and a revision . The acceptance of such a distinction would be wholly illogical quite apart from being manifestly arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The respondents, having accepted the directive of the CBDT insofar as appeals are concerned, cannot be permitted to justifiably take the position that the same would not extend to revisions. Once the CBDT had clarified that cases where the limitation for filing of appeals had not expired on 31 January 2020 would also be covered, it would be wholly unfair to hold that the same principle would not apply to a revision. More importantly, the clarificatory directive of the Board must be interpreted and understood in light of the underlying legislative policy of the VSV Act of providing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollowing terms:- 3. Mr. Ankit Aggarwal, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, has, broadly, taken us through the record. 3.1. It appears that the petitioner had filed Forms 1 and 2, under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (in short 2020 Act ) twice, i.e., on 10.03.2021 and 23.03.2021, however, both times, it was rejected. The first time, it was rejected was on 23.03.2021. The petitioner refiled Forms 1 and 2 on the same date, i.e., 23.03.2021, which stood rejected on 05.04.2021. 3.2. It appears that the principal reason given for the rejection of the aforementioned forms is that the petitioner s revision application filed under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 1961 Act ) was not pending as on the specified date, i.e., 31.01.2020. 3.3. It is Mr. Aggarwal s contention that the aforesaid reasoning given in the impugned orders of rejection is flawed. It is his contention that against the re-assessment order, passed under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the 1961 Act for the assessment year (in short AY ) 2012-13 dated 13.11.2019 [which was received on 24.01.2020], a revision application was filed by the petitioner under Section 264 of the 1961 Act on 06. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sently, we are told, expires on 30.06.2021. 7. Given the aforesaid directions that have been issued in the matter, Mr. Aggarwal says, he does not wish to press the interim application any further. CM No. 18281/2021 is, thus, closed. 8. List this matter on 22.09.2021. 3. Pursuant to the above, the petitioner has already deposited 100% of the disputed tax liability and a Form-5 dated 13 December 2021 has also come to be issued, albeit subject to the outcome of the present writ petition. The solitary question which therefore merits consideration is whether the filing of the revision after the specified date but within the period of limitation as available rendered the petitioners ineligible from availing the beneficial coverage of the VSV Act. 4. The dispute itself pertains to Assessment Year 2012-13 when an assessment under Section 147 came to be completed on 13 November 2019. The petitioner contends that the aforesaid assessment came to be concluded without a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act having been issued. In the meanwhile and by virtue of the Finance Bill, 2020, the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme Scheme came to be promulgated aimed at reducing and resolving disputes pertaining ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the specified date would be covered as well. The respondents read this part of the Board directive as intended to mean that only those revisions which had either been instituted or were pending on 31 January 2020 would be covered. 8. Insofar as the petitioner is concerned, it discloses that it preferred a revision on 01 March 2021 taking the benefit of the extension of limitation which came to be notified by the respondents consequent to the outbreak of the COVID 19 pandemic. It has referred to the provisions made in Section 3 of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Ordinance, 2020 and in terms of which the last date for filing of appeals, replies, or applications came to be extended up to 31 March 2021. The petitioner also refers to the orders passed by the Supreme Court on Suo Moto 3/2020 wherein the Supreme Court had extended limitation for filing petitions/ applications/ suits/ appeals/ all other proceedings in light of the challenges faced by persons throughout the country on account of the nation-wide lockdown and the virus outbreak. It is pursuant to the above that the revision came to be instituted by the petitioner within the extended period of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ambit of the clarification merely to appeals and exclude other avenues of redress which were otherwise available to be pursued on the specified date. 13. In our considered opinion, the Scheme as well as the provisions of the VSV Act constitute beneficial legislation and are liable to be construed and interpreted accordingly. We, in this connection, draw sustenance from the following pertinent observations as rendered in MUFG Bank Ltd. vs. CIT 2022 SCC OnLine Del 4096 . 26. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the primary question that needs to be answered is what is the rule of interpretation that the court must apply while interpreting the Dtvsv Act. 27. Every modern legislation is actuated with some policy. While the intent of taxing statutes is to collect taxes, the intent of amnesty acts like Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme (for short VDI Scheme ) is to provide an opportunity to the assesses to declare their undisclosed income on fulfilling certain terms and conditions. There are also legislations which are directed to cure some mischief and bring into effect some type of reform by improving the system or by relaxing the rigour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of interest and penalty provided he pays by 31-3-2020. Those who avail this scheme after 31-3-2020 will have to pay some additional amount. The scheme will remain open till 30-6-2020 . I hope that taxpayers will make use of this opportunity to get relief from vexatious litigation process . 31. From the aforesaid, it is apparent that Dtvsv Act, 2020 is a beneficial/remedial piece of legislation enacted by Parliament to reduce pendency of cases, generate timely Revenue for the Government and provide certainty and savings of resources that would be spent on the long drawn litigation process. It is a statute which provides benefit as it recovers the taxes for the department upfront without having to wait to succeed in the litigation which itself is uncertain. Dtvsv Act also provides a sop to an assessee, as it puts an end to the litigation and the assessee is relieved of payment of interest and penalty if the same were to imposed. The Dtvsv Act also benefits the society as it reduces litigation, acrimony, decongests the courts and relieves the system of unnecessary burden. Consequently, this Court is of the view that Dtvsv Act is neither a taxing statute nor an amnesty act. It is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
