2024 (1) TMI 119

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unsel for Income Tax Department appearing for the respondent. 3. From the pleadings it appears that the petitioner in order to avail the benefit of the scheme under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, was required to make a payment of Rs. 1,10,35,340/- up till 31.03.2021 and with interest at the rate of 10% amount of Rs. 1,21,38,874/- up till 31.10.2021. 4. As is known to all, the said period was one when the whole world was reeling with COVID pandemic. There were compelling circumstances for the business world in making payments all around. Nonetheless, under the aforesaid scheme, the petitioner was able to make 75% of the payment out of the total of Rs. 1,21,38,874/- i.e. Rs. 90,00,000/- by 31.10.2021 itself which is admitted by the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f COVID and the death of petitioner's father, this is a fit case for invocation of the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India." 6. A similar issue came up before the High Court of Delhi in the case of I.A. Housing Solution Private Limited Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4 2022 SCC OnLine Del 3647 : (2023) 330 CTR 167 decided on 02.11.2022 wherein the High Court of Delhi in paragraph Nos. 19 to 24 had held as under: "19. One of us (Manmohan, J) in Siddharth International Public School v. Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, (2016) SCC OnLine Del 4797, para 41 has held, "it is settled law that this Court has extremely broad jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution and under the said Article it can pass what....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rayer of the Petitioners. Rather, the Respondents benefit and achieve the purpose of the Scheme, namely, 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. 23. Consequently as the delay in payment in the present cases were unintentional and supported by justifiable reasons, this Court is of the opinion that the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred, and this unintentional delay deserves to be condoned. This approach will only further the object and purpose of the VSV Act. RELIEF 24. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present writ petitions are allowed and the respondents are directed to accept ....