NAVNEET KUMAR TAPARIA, MUMBAI V. ITO 18 (2)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1815/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1241 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 28-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SMITA VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: MEET DANGARWALA
• Keywords: Competent authority; TDS
• Section: 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1815/MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SHRI NAVNEET KUMAR TAPARIA, 204, VINOD VILLA, 66 JAGRITIMATAJI MANDIR, RAMWADI KALBADEVI ROAD, MUMBAI- 400 002. PAN : AADPT6990K (APPELLANT) VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 18(2)(4), MUMBAI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI MEET DANGARWALA REVENUE BY : MS. SMITA VERMA ITA NO. 2296/MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 UMESH S JAGGI, E-25, PUNJAB SOCIETY, TAGORE ROAD, SANTACRUZ (W), MUMBAI 400 054. PAN : AAAPJ7848M (APPELLANT) VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 22(3)(5), MUMBAI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MS DINKLE HARIYA REVENUE BY : MS. SMITA VERMA ITA NO. 94/AHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 DCB BANK LIMITED., 6 TH FLOOR, PENINSULA BUSINESS PARK, TOWER A, SENAPATI BAPAT MARG, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI 400 013. PAN : AAAPJ7848M (APPELLANT) VS. ADDL. CIT TDS RANGE AHMEDABAD. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SATISH MODY REVENUE BY : MS. SMITA VERMA 2 ITA NO. 7230/MUM/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 TRAFIGURA INDIA PVT. LTD., UNIT NO.1101, A- WING, PLOT NO.C, 66G BLOCK ONE, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E), MUMBAI 400 051. PAN : AADCT3128N (APPELLANT) VS. DCIT 14(3)(1), MUMBAI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI RAVI CHHANGANI REVENUE BY : MS. SMITA VERMA ITA NO. 260/MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 JAI ENTERPIRSES, 21 VEENA BANNA, GROUND FLOOR, OPP BANDRA STATION, BANDRA (W), MUMBAI 400 050. PAN : AAEFJ8307R (APPELLANT) VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 23(2)(1), MUMBAI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MS. SMITA VERMA ITA NO. 5164/MUM/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 HARAKCHAND P SHAH HUF, 8/D, 48, SONAWALA BUILDING, SLEATER ROAD, GRANT ROAD (W), MUMBAI 400 007. PAN : AABHH5871H (APPELLANT) VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(1)(5), MUMBAI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MS. SMITA VERMA 3 ITA NO. 7365/MUM/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 RAJESH INDUSTRIES, 5, SAMEER BUILDING, 13 TH KHETWADI BACK ROAD, MUMBAI 400 004. PAN : AAAFR2509M (APPELLANT) VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(3)(1), MUMBAI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI VISHESH SHRIVASTAV REVENUE BY : MS. SMITA VERMA ITA NO. 5094/MUM/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 ISHA AGRO DEVELOPERS PVT LTD., PLOT NO.33, ABCD GOVT. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, CHARKOP, KANDIVALI (W), MUMBAI -400 067. PAN : AABCI7114H (APPELLANT) VS. ASST. CIT 12(2)(2), MUMBAI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MS. SMITA VERMA DATE OF HEARING : 14 .12.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14 .12.2020 O R D E R THESE ARE APPEALS, BY DIFFERENT ASSESSEES, DIRECTED AGAINST RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF LEARNED CIT(A), PERTAINING TO RELEVANT ASSESSMEN T YEARS MENTIONED ABOVE. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IN THE RESPECTIVE CASES IT IS NOT ED THAT THE ASSESSEES HAVE OPTED FOR SOLUTION OF DISPUTE UNDER THE VIVAD SE VI SHWAS SCHEME. 4 3. I NOTE THAT IN A SIMILAR SITUATION, HON'BLE MADR AS HIGH COURT HAS IN AN APPEAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. NANNUSAMY MOHAN (HUF) VS ACIT V IDE ORDER DATED 16.10.2020 HELD AS UNDER :- 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT / ASSESSE E, ON INSTRUCTIONS, SUBMITTED THAT THE APPELLANT / ASSESSEE INTENDS TO AVAIL THE BENEFIT OF VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME (VVS SCHEME FOR BREVITY) AND IN THIS REGARD, THE ASSESSEE IS TAKING STEPS TO FILE THE APPLICATION / DECLARATION IN FORM NO. I. 4. IT MAY NOT BE NECESSARY FOR THIS COURT TO DECIDE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW FRAMED FOR CONSIDERATION ON ACCOUN T OF CERTAIN SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENTS. THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ENACTED THE D IRECT TAX VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT, 2020 (ACT 3 OF 2020) TO PROVIDE FOR RE SOLUTION OF DISPUTED TAX AND FOR MATTERS CONNECTED THEREWITH OR INCIDENTAL T HERETO. THE ACT OF THE PARLIAMENT RECEIVED THE ASSENT OF THE PRESIDENT ON 17 TH MARCH 2020 AND PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF INDIA ON 17 TH MARCH 2020. 5. IN TERMS OF THE SAID ACT, THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GIVEN AN OPTION TO PUT AN END TO THE TAX DISPUTES, WHICH MAY BE PENDING AT DIFFERENT LEVELS EITHER BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY OR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL OR BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OR BEFORE THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA. UNDER SECTION 2(J) DISPUTED TAX HAS BEEN DEFINED. IN TERMS OF SECTIO N 3, WHERE A DECLARANT MEANS A PERSON, WHO FILES A DECLARATION UNDER SECTI ON 4 ON OR BEFORE THE LAST DATE FILES A DECLARATION TO THE DESIGNATED AUT HORITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 4 IN RESPECT OF TAX ARREA RS, THEN, NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE INCOME TAX ACT OR ANY OTH ER LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE, THE AMOUNT PAYABLE BY THE DECLARANT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN TERMS OF SECTION 3(A-C) THEREUNDER. 6. THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 3 STATES THAT IN CA SE, WHERE AN APPEAL OR WRIT PETITION OR SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION IS FILED BY THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITY ON ANY ISSUE BEFORE THE APPELLATE FORUM, THE AMOUNT PA YABLE SHALL BE ONE-HALF OF THE AMOUNT IN THE TABLE STIPULATED IN SECTION 3 CALCULATED ON SUCH ISSUE, IN SUCH A MANNER AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED. THE SECOND PROV ISO DEALS WITH THE CASES, WHERE THE MATTER IS BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) OR BEFORE THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL. THE THIRD PROVISO DEALS W ITH CASES, WHERE THE ISSUE IS PENDING BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TR IBUNAL. THE FILING OF THE DECLARATION IS AS PER SECTION 4 OF THE ACT AND THE PARTICULARS TO BE FURNISHED ARE ALSO MENTIONED IN THE SUB SECTIONS OF SECTION 4 . SECTION 5 OF THE ACT DEALS WITH THE TIME AND MANNER OF THE PAYMENT AND S ECTION 6 DEALS WITH IMMUNITY FROM INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS IN RESPECT OF OFFENCE AND IMPOSITION 5 OF PENALTY IN CERTAIN CASES. SECTION 9 OF THE ACT D EALS WITH CASES, WHERE THE ACT 3 OF 2020 WILL NOT BE APPLICABLE. 7. AS OBSERVED, THE ASSESSEE IS GIVEN LIBERTY TO RE STORE THIS APPEAL IN THE EVENT THE ULTIMATE DECISION TO BE TAKEN ON THE DECL ARATION TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE SAID ACT IS NOT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. IF SUCH A PRAYER IS MADE, THE REGISTRY SHALL ENTERTAIN THE PRAYER WITHOUT INSISTING UPON ANY APPLICATION TO BE FILED FOR COND ONATION OF DELAY IN RESTORATION OF THE APPEAL AND ON SUCH REQUEST MADE BY THE ASSESSEE BY FILING A MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FOR RESTORATION, THE REGIS TRY SHALL PLACE SUCH PETITION BEFORE THE DIVISION BENCH FOR ORDERS. 8. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE, WE DIRECT THE APPELLA NT / ASSESSEE TO FILE THE FORM NO.I ON OR BEFORE 20.11.2020 AND THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY SHALL PROCESS THE APPLICATION / DECLARATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE PRE FERABLY WITHIN A PERIOD OF SIX (6) WEEKS FROM THE DATE ON WHICH THE DECLARATIO N IS FILED IN THE PROPER FORM. ACCORDINGLY, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE AND N OTING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEES ARE OPTING FOR RESOLUTION OF DISPUTE UNDER VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME IN THE PRESENT APPEALS, I TREAT THESE APPEALS BEING DISPOSED OFF AS WITHDRAWN. 4. THE ASSESSEES ARE GIVEN LIBERTY FOR RESTORATION OF APPEAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT ORDER AS ABOV E. REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT FOR BOTH THE SIDES FAIRLY AGREED TO THE ABOVE PROPOSITI ON 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS BY THE RESPECTIVE ASS ESSEES IS DISPOSED OF BY TREATING THE SAME AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH DECEMBER 2020 SD/ - (SHAMIM YAHYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE : 14 TH DECEMBER, 2020 SA 6 COPY TO : 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE D.R, SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI