TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (6) TMI 1054
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 246A of the Act of 1961 before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (for short, 'the CIT'), on 19.02.2019; that the said appeal was dismissed by the CIT on 18.09.2019; that assailing the said order, the petitioner preferred further appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') on 25.01.2021, along with an application to condone the delay in filing such appeal; and that the Tribunal heard the appeal of the petitioner on 05.02.2021 by condoning the delay and by order dt.15.02.2021, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and remitted the matter back by restoring the file to the CIT. 3. It is further contended by the petitioner that, in the interregnum, the Government of India had enacted the Act of 2020 dt. 17.03.2020; and that the said enactment was intended to "provide for resolution of disputed tax and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto". 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that in respect of the tax dispute relating to the Assessment Year 2011-12, he intended to avail the benefit under the Act of 2020, and accordingly, submitted application in the prescribed form on 08.02.2021. It is claimed that, in the said application fil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4.2021. The reason of such rejection is stated as - "the assessee filed revised application on 31.03.2021." As per the DTVSV, there should be an appeal pending before any of the appellate authorities as on 31.01.2020. Since in this case, no appeal is pending as on 31.01.2020, the application filed is invalid and accordingly rejected." Contentions of Petitioner : 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that having regard to the scheme of the Act of 2020 and various clarifications issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes in exercise of powers conferred under Sections 10 and 11 therein from time to time, the appeal filed by the petitioner before the Tribunal, even though with an application for condonation of delay, has to be considered, as dispute pending as on the "specified date" under the Act of 2020. 10. It is further contended that the Tribunal on 05.02.2021 had accepted the application filed by the petitioner seeking to condone the delay in filing the appeal, and took up the appeal for hearing for adjudication on merits, and ultimately on 15.02.2021 the appeal was allowed and was remanded back to the CIT for re-adjudication. Thus, it is contended that upon t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... time limit for filing appeal expired between 01st April, 2019 to 31st Jan,2020, such benefit has to be extended to all appellants uniformly,(i.e.,) whoever seeks to file declaration/application under the Act of 2020 falling within the above period, and it cannot be restricted only to appeals where application for condonation is filed up to the date of issue of circular on 04.12.2020. Therefore, it is contended that the petitioner, having filed declaration/application on 08.02.2021 seeking resolution of the pending dispute under the Act of 2020, and having regard to the fact that by the said date, the appeal filed by the petitioner was pending before the Tribunal along with application for delay condonation, the petitioner would have to be considered as eligible and entitled to avail the benefit under the Act of 2020. Thus, it is contended that the reasons assigned by the 1st respondent in rejecting the declaration filed is contrary to the object sought to be achieved by Act of 2020 and the circulars issued thereunder. Contentions of respondents : 14. Counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of respondents. 15. Per contra, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p in these appeals. As on 30th November, 2019, the amount of disputed direct tax arrears is Rs. 9.32 lakh crores. Considering that the actual direct tax collection in the financial year 2018-19 was Rs. 11.3 lakh crores, the disputed tax arrears constitute nearly one year direct tax collection. 2. Tax disputes consume copious amount of time, energy and resources both on the part of the Government as well as taxpayers. More over, they also deprive the Government of the timely collection of revenue. Therefore, there is an urgent need to provide for resolution of pending tax disputes. This will not only benefit the Government by generating timely revenue but also the taxpayers who will be able to deploy the time, energy and resources saved by opting for such dispute resolution towards their business activities. 3. It is, therefore, proposed to introduce direct tax Vivad Se Vishwas Bill, 2020 for dispute resolution related to direct taxes, which, inter alia, provides for the following, namely :-- (a) the provisions of the Bill shall be applicable to appeals filed by taxpayers or the Government, which are pending with the Commissioner (Appeals), Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, High ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd benefit, as he is required to pay only the amount of disputed taxes and would get complete waiver of interest and penalty. The relevant portion of the Budget Speech of the Hon'ble Finance Minister made on 1st February 2020, while placing the Bill before the Parliament, reads as under: "Sir, in the past our Government has taken several measures to reduce tax litigations. In the last budget, Sub Ka Vishwas scheme was brought in to reduce litigation in indirect taxes. It resulted in settling over 1,89,000 cases. Currently, there are 4,83,000 direct tax cases pending in various appellate forums, i.e., Commissioner (Appeals), ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court. This year, I propose to bring a scheme similar to the indirect tax, Sub Ka Vishwas for reducing litigations even in the direct taxes. Under the proposed Vivad Se Vishwas scheme, a taxpayer would be required to pay only the amount of disputed taxes and will get complete waiver of interest and penalty provided he pays, by 31st March, 2020. Those who avail the scheme after 31st March 2020, will have to pay some additional amount. The scheme will remain open till 30th June 2020. Taxpayers in whose cases appeals are pending at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case, it is to be seen that the Act of 2020 is intended to apply to all direct tax disputes which are pending at various levels, before the "specified date", as defined in Section 2(n) of the Act of 2020, i.e., 31st day of January, 2020. 29. Though the cut-off date is mentioned as 31st day of January 2020, by Notification No.21/2020, dt. 04.12.2020, which has been issued by the Board exercising powers conferred under Sections 10 and 11 of the Act of 2020, it has been stated that even in respect of appeals where time for filing appeal has expired during the period 1st April 2019 to 31st January 2020, and an application for condonation of delay is filed before the date of issue of Circular No.21/2020 on 04.12.2020, and the appeal is admitted before the filing of declaration, such appeal is to be treated as deemed pending as on 31st January 2020. 30. It is to be noted that the date for filing of declaration under the Act of 2020 opting to avail the benefit of Scheme was originally notified as 30.03.2020, which was extended from time to time, including up to 31.12.2020. 31. Subsequently the time for filing declarations under the Act of 2020 was finally extended by Notification No.9/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thereby violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 39. In the present case, the petitioner having filed an appeal before Tribunal along with an application for condonation and the Tribunal, having heard the matter on 05.02.2021 by condoning the delay, it is to be construed as 'pending' appeal as on the date of filing of declaration on 08.02.2021. As a matter of fact, the Tribunal by order dt.15.02.2021, allowed the appeal of the petitioner remitted the matter back by restoring the appeal on the file of CIT, for fresh adjudication. 40. The natural corollary of the Tribunal accepting the application for condonation is to the effect that the appeal before the Tribunal as having been filed in time, since, such condonation would relate back to the date by which time, the appeal against the order of CIT ought to have been filed by the petitioner. Once it is considered that the appeal before the Tribunal is deemed as having been filed in time, the same would have to be construed as having been filed before the "specified date", and thus, an appeal can be stated to be pending before the appellate forum and the petitioner would have to be considered as an 'appellant' as defined in....