2021 (10) TMI 72

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation in Forms 1 and 2 under the DTVSV Act 2020. Back ground facts : 2. It is the contention of the petitioner that the 4th respondent had completed the assessment of the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2013- 14 under Section 143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act of 1961') on 23.03.2016; that aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 246A of the Act of 1961 before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (for short, 'the CIT'), on 08.05.2016; that the said appeal was dismissed by the CIT on 06.02.2019; that assailing the said order, the petitioner preferred further appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') on 23.02.2021, along with an application to condone the delay in filing such appeal; and that the Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal by order dated 22.03.2021, and allowed the petitioner to withdraw the appeal to avail the benefit under the DTVSV Act 2020. 3. It is further contended by the petitioner that, in similar circumstances, when a challenge to Circular No.21 of 2020, dated 04.12.2020, was laid before a Division Bench of this Court, in the case of Boddu Ramesh v/s. Designated Auth....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ive parties. 7. This Court, in the decision rendered in Boddu Ramesh's case (supra) had observed in paras 30 to 35 as under: '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.9/2021 dt.26.02.2021 up to 31.03.2021. So petitioners application filed on 08.02.2021, was with in time. 32. However, while providing answer to Q.No.59, in Circular No.21/2020 issued on 04.12.2020, the last date for filing declaration under the Act of 2020 was considered as 31.12.2020, as notified by the Government at the relevant point in time. 33. It is only on 31.12.2020, the time for filing declarations under the Act of 2020 was extended for further period. 34. In the answer provided to Q.No. 59 in circular No 21/2020, it is stated that even "if the limitation for filing appeal has expired before 31.01.2020, i.e., the 'specified date', if an application for condonation of delay is filed on or before the date of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and 2 under DTVSV Act, 2020 on 05.03.2021, i.e., before 31.03.2021, the last date specified for filing declaration. 11. Thus, on the date of filing of declaration in Forms 1 & 2 by the petitioner under the DTVSV Act, 2020, the appeal was pending before the Tribunal along with an application for condonation of delay in filing such appeal. Further, the fact of Tribunal accepting the appeal filed by the petitioner on 23.02.2021, by condoning the delay on 22.03.2021, would amount to the appeal against the order of the CIT dated 06.02.2019 as having been filed in time. The result of both the above facts would lead to inevitable conclusion that the declaration filed by the petitioner on 05.03.2021 would have to be considered as validly filed. 12. Further, this Court also cannot lose sight of the fact of the concession made by the respondents before the Tribunal, which has been recorded by the Tribunal as under: '5. Ld. DR submitted that if the assessee desires to avail the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme, the revenue has no objection.' 13. As the respondents did not oppose the condonation of delay and also the prayer of the petitioner to withdraw the appeal to avail the benefit of the DTVSV....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Department, these numbers, especially the value of amounts involved, have been rising sharply overtime. 9.23 What is interesting is that the success rate of the Department at all three levels of Appeal - Appellate Tribunals, High Courts, and Supreme Court - and for both direct and indirect tax litigation is under 30%. In some cases, it is as low as 12%. The Department unambiguously looses 65% of its cases. Over a period of time, the success rate of the Department has only been declining, while that of the assessees has been increasing. 9.24 Nonetheless, the Department is the largest litigant. The Department's appeals constitute nearly 85% of the total number of appeals filed in the case of direct taxes, though that number seems to have improved in the case of indirect taxes. Of the total number of direct tax cases pending by the quarter ending March, 2017, the Department initiated 88% of the litigation at ITATs and Supreme Court and 83% of the litigation pending at High Courts. 9.25 The picture that emerges over a period of time is the following: even though the Department's strike rate has been falling considerably over a period of time, it is undeterred, and persists in ....