<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (12) TMI 653 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446969</link>
    <description>The HC set aside orders rejecting a declaration under the Direct Tax Vivaad se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Designated Authority had rejected the deceased assessee&#039;s declaration claiming the appeal pendency condition wasn&#039;t satisfied. The court held that &quot;pending&quot; in Section 2(1)(a) means an appeal filed and not yet adjudicated, regardless of validity or admission status. Citing SC precedents, the court ruled that appeals remain pending even if ultimately found incompetent. The court declared CBDT&#039;s FAQ No.59 of Circular No.21/2020 contrary to law insofar as it required appeal admission as a condition precedent for VSV Act eligibility. The respondent was directed to process the claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2023 18:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=735274" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (12) TMI 653 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446969</link>
      <description>The HC set aside orders rejecting a declaration under the Direct Tax Vivaad se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Designated Authority had rejected the deceased assessee&#039;s declaration claiming the appeal pendency condition wasn&#039;t satisfied. The court held that &quot;pending&quot; in Section 2(1)(a) means an appeal filed and not yet adjudicated, regardless of validity or admission status. Citing SC precedents, the court ruled that appeals remain pending even if ultimately found incompetent. The court declared CBDT&#039;s FAQ No.59 of Circular No.21/2020 contrary to law insofar as it required appeal admission as a condition precedent for VSV Act eligibility. The respondent was directed to process the claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446969</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>