SUSHILA KAVAR, CHENNAI V. ITO,NCW6(3), CHENNAI

ITA 230/CHNY/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3722 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-04-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 22-06-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ ᭠यायपीठ, चे᳖ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी महावीर ͧसंह, उपाÚय¢ एवं ᮰ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद᭭य के समᭃ BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 230 & 231/CHNY/2021 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Sushila Kavar, No.14, Ramanujan Iyer Street, Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079. PAN: AADPK 3839L v. The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward-6(3), Chennai -06. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri M. Abhishek, CA ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri P. Muthushankar, Addl.CIT स ु नवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 27.04.2022 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 27.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: These appeals by the assessee are arising out of different orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre in Appeal Nos.NFAC/2011-12/10001719 & 10001712 both dated 26.04.2021. 2 I.T.A. Nos.230 & 231/Chny/2021 2. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee took us through the order of CIT(A) and stated that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal by observing as under:- “I have perused the information furnished by the appellant and it is understood that the appellant has opted for “Vivad Se Viswas Scheme- 2020” and accordingly paid relevant taxes. In this regard Form-5 has also been issued by the concerned CIT/Pr.CIT, Chennai. Hence, the appeal filed is therefore disposed off accordingly.” The observation in other appeal is also exactly same as above. The ld.counsel stated that the CIT(A) was under wrong impression that the assessee had opted for “Vivad Se Viswas Scheme-2020” but actually the assessee never opted for “Vivad Se Viswas Scheme- 2020” and hence, he requested that matter can be restored back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the issues on merits. 3. When this fact was confronted to ld. Senior DR, he fairly conceded the position. 4. After hearing both the sides and going through the fact that the CIT(A) under wrong notion that the assessee has preferred application under “Vivad Se Viswas Scheme-2020” and settled the disputed tax under the same, dismissed the appeals. Now, the ld.counsel for the assessee made statement that the assessee never 3 I.T.A. Nos.230 & 231/Chny/2021 opted for “Vivad Se Viswas Scheme-2020” and as the Revenue despite opportunity given could not prove that the assessee preferred “Vivad Se Viswas Scheme-2020”, we set aside the orders of CIT(A) and remand the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication. These two appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 27 th April, 2022 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (जी. मंजुनाथ) (G. MANJUNATHA) लेखा सद᭭य /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (महावीर ᳲसह ) (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा᭟यᭃ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 27 th April, 2022 RSR आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुᲦ (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयुᲦ /CIT 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध/DR 6. गाडᭅ फाईल/GF.