Just a moment...

Top
Help
Upgrade to AI Search

We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:

1. Basic
Quick overview summary answering your query with referencesCategory-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI

2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
Detailed report covering:
     -   Overview Summary
     -   Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
     -   Relevant Case Laws
     -   Tariff / Classification / HSN
     -   Expert views from TaxTMI
     -   Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy

• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:

Explore AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2022 (11) TMI 26

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he grounds that (i) appeal had been filed before CIT(A) after limitation period for filing the appeal had expired, (ii) FAQ-59 did not cover the case of the petitioner and (iii) an order under Section 249(3) condoning delay was necessary for eligibility under VSV Act. The relevant portion of the impugned order dated 23rd January, 2021 is reproduced hereinbelow:- "CREDIT IN FORM 3 HAS BEEN GIVEN PROVISIONALLY ON THE BASIS OF OLTAS DATA. AO SHOULD ENSURE CONSUMPTIOIN OF ALL CHALLAS AGAINST CORRECT DEMANDS IMMEDIATELY. In this case penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs.74290830/- was imposed which was confirmed by CIT(A) and appeal against the same is pending in ITAT. In respect of quantum, the AO passed order on 22.12.2016, as per Form-35. It was served on 23.06.2017 and appeal was filed on 24.05.2019, which is late appeal. FAQ 59 does not cover assesssee's case. Therefore, only penalty appeal is being settled on payment of 25% of penalty amount. Form 3 has been issued accordingly." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent No.1 erred in not appreciating that in terms of the Section 2(1)(a)(i) read with Section 2(1)(b) read with Section 2(1)(n) of the VSV Act, th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ary, 2020. 8. He also stated that the petitioner filed an appeal against the assessment order dated 22nd December, 2016 before the CIT(A) on 24th May, 2019 i.e. after a delay of about two years from the date of expiry of limitation on 22nd July, 2017, along with an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the said appeal. 9. He stated that the petitioner opted for VSV Scheme and filed a declaration under VSV Act, 2020 on 18th December, 2020, to settle the pending disputes before the CIT(A) in quantum appeal and ITAT in penalty appeal. 10. He contended that though the designated authority, in view of the VSV Act, 2020 allowed the settlement of the penalty as the penalty appeal was pending on the prescribed date i.e. on 31st January, 2020, yet the designated authority, in view of FAQ-59 issued by CBDT vide Circular No.21/2020 namely F.NO.IT(A)/1/2020-TPL dated 4th December, 2020, rejected the declaration of the petitioner qua the quantum appeal. The FAQ-59 in CBDT Circular No.21/2020 dated 4th December, 2020 is reproduced hereinbelow:- "Q-59. Whether the taxpayer in whose case the time limit for filing of appeal has expired before 31 Jan 2020 but an application for con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ection contemplates pendency of an appeal, what is required is that an appeal should be pending and in such a case there is no need to introduce the qualification that it should be valid or competent. In Raja Kulkarni v. The State of Bombay reported in AIR 1954 SC 73, the Supreme Court has held that "whether an appeal is valid or competent is a question entirely for the appellate court before whom the appeal is filed to decide and this determination is possible only after the appeal is heard but there is nothing to prevent a party from filing an appeal which may ultimately be found to be incompetent, e.g. when it is held to be barred by limitation. From the mere fact that such an appeal is held to be unmaintainable on any ground whatsoever, it does not follow that there was no appeal pending before the Court". 16. To the same effect is the law laid down by the judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Tirupati Balaji Developers (P) Ltd. v. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in (2004) 5 SCC 1 and Commr. of Income Tax, Rajkot Versus Shatrusailya Digvijaysingh Jadeja, (2005) 7 SCC 294. In the said cases, it has been held that an appeal does not cease to be an appeal though irregular....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s contemplated therein cannot be adverse to the assessee. Thus, the authority which wields the power for its own advantage under the Act is given the right to forego the advantage when required to wield it in a manner it considers just by relaxing the rigour of the law or in other permissible manner as laid down in Section 119. The power is given for the purpose of just, proper and efficient management of the work of assessment and in public interest. It is a beneficial power given to the Board for proper administration of fiscal law so that undue hardship may not be caused to the assessee and the fiscal laws may be correctly applied. Hard cases which can be properly categorised as belonging to a class, can thus be given the benefit of relaxation of law by issuing circulars binding on the taxing authorities." (emphasis supplied) 20. It is also settled law that when the Supreme Court or High Court declare the law on a question arising for consideration, then the view expressed by the Supreme Court or the High Court has to be given effect to and not the circular issued by the CBDT. The Supreme Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Bolpur vs. Ratan Melting & Wire Industries, (2....