Liberty to the assessee to get the appeal restored in case assessee does not succeed on a declaration filed under VSVS 2020.

Last updated: 02 March 2021

Save Share

Quick Summary

This ruling clarifies that if an assessee files a declaration under the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme 2020 and it does not succeed, they retain the liberty to have their original appeal restored. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal referenced a Madras High Court decision supporting this approach, acknowledging the intention behind the VSVS scheme.

Court :
ITAT Mumbai

Brief :
These cross appeals in ITA No.2301/Mum/2018 & 2123/Mum/2018for A.Y.2011-12 arise out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)-17/IT-387/14-15 dated31/01/2018 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passedu/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 23/02/2015 by the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-10(2)(2), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO).

Citation :
ITA 2301/MUM/2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT),
‘D‘ BENCH MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM
&
SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM

ITA No.2301/Mum/2018
(Assessment Year :2011-12)

M/s. Bayer Cropscience Ltd.,
(Successor to Monsanto
India Limited
Ahura Centre
5th Floor
96, Mahakali Caves Road
Andheri (East)
Mumbai – 400 093
PAN/GIR No.BCSL- AAACB9651K
MIL- AAACM2875L
(Appellant)

Vs.

Deputy Commissioner of
Income Tax
Range 10(2)(2)
Aayakar Bhavan
M.K.Road,
Mumbai – 400 020
(Respondent)

ITA No.2123/Mum/2018
(Assessment Year: 2011-12)

Deputy Commissioner of
Income Tax
Range 10(2)(2)
Aayakar Bhavan
M.K.Road,
Mumbai – 400 020
PAN/GIR No.BCSL- AAACB9651K
MIL- AAACM2875L
(Appellant)

Vs.

M/s. Bayer Cropscience Ltd.,
(Successor to Monsanto India
Limited
Ahura Centre, 5th Floor
96, Mahakali Caves Road
Andheri (East)
Mumbai – 400 093
.. (Respondent)

Assessee by Ms. Jasmin
Revenue by Shri Sanjay Sethi

Date of Hearing 11/02/2021
Date of Pronouncement 11/02/2021

O R D E R

PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M):

These cross appeals in ITA No.2301/Mum/2018 & 2123/Mum/2018for A.Y.2011-12 arise out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)-17/IT-387/14-15 dated31/01/2018 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passedu/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 23/02/2015 by the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-10(2)(2), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO).

2. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee stated in letter dated 08/02/2021 that assessee had preferred an application under Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme 2020 in respect ofthe aforesaid assessment years by filing Form No.3 before the competent authority.

3. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Since, the assessee had alreadyfiled an application under direct tax “Vivad Se Viswas Scheme Act2020”, there is no need to keep the appeal pending before us in view ofthe decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of NannusamyMohan (HUF) vs. ACIT in T.C.A. No.372 of 2020 dated 16.10.2020,wherein the Hon‟ble High Court after considering the intention of theassessee to avail the benefit of „Vivad se Vishwas Scheme-2020‟ (VSV scheme), had dismissed the appeal by observing in Para 7 to 9 as under:-

To know more in details find the attachment file