Appeal Details
Counselvise Citation
[2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5440 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
1 year(s) 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
05-01-2021
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
D
Next Hearing Date
05-01-2021
Assessment Year
2014-2015
Appeal Filed On
21-10-2019
Judgement Text
, , IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHE NNAI . , , # BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.NO. ITA NO. AY APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1. IT(TP)67/CHNY/18 2014-15 M/S. GE POWER CONVERSION INDIA PVT. LTD., [SUCCESSOR TO GE POWER CONVERSION TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD. & FORMERLY KNOWN AS CONVERTEAM EDC PVT. LTD.] KAMAK TOWERS, PLOT NO. 12-A(SP), THIRU VI KA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, EKKATUTHANGAL, GUINDY, CHENNAI 600 032. [PAN: AADCC1026E] AR: SHRI ASHIK SHAH, C.A. ITO, CORPORATE WARD 2(4), CHENNAI. DR: MS. R. ANITA, JCIT 2. 3340/CHNY/16 2012-13 SHRI B. RAJESH, NO. 24, 3 RD STREET, ROYAPETTAH HIGH ROAD, MYLAPORE, CHENNAI 600 004. [PAN: AAEPR5069A] AR: NONE DCIT, NCC 17(1), CHENNAI DR: MS. R. ANITA, JCIT 3. 4. 2960/CHNY/19 2961/CHNY/19 2013-14 2014-15 M/S. PRICOL LIMITED, 109, CPM TOWERS, RACE COURSE ROAD, COIMBATORE 641 018. [PAN: AABCP2380C] AR: SHRI H. YESHWANTH KUMAR, C.A. DCIT/ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2, COIMBATORE. DR: MS. R. ANITA, JCIT 5. 6. 2283/CHNY/19 CO NO. 93/CHNY/19 2010-11 DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), NEW BLOCK, ROOM NO. 411, 4 TH FLOOR, 121, MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI 600 034. DR: MS. R. ANITA, JCIT SHRI R.P. KRISHNAMACHARI, NO. 75, TEXTAN HOUSE, 4 TH AVENUE, ASHOK NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 083. [PAN: AACPK9972H] AR: SHRI D. PALANIVEL, ADV. 7. 2515/CHNY/17 2012-13 M/S. PALFINGER CRANES INDI A PVT. LTD., NO. 37, VARADARAJAPURAM, NAZARATHPET, POONAMALLEE, CHENNAI 600 123. [PAN: AAECP9383N] AR: SHRI SAROJ KUMAR PARIDA, ADV. ITO, CORPORATE WARD 5(1), CHENNAI 600 034. DR: MS. R. ANITA, JCIT 8. 1323/CHNY/18 2015-16 SHRI PRATIK AGARWAL, C/O V. RAVICHANDRAN, 49 (OLD NO. 24), SIXTH MAIN ROAD, RAJA ANNAMALAIPURAM, CHENNAI 600 028. [PAN: BEKPP8764H] AR: SHRI. ARJUN RAJ, C.A. FOR SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE ACIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 5 CHENNAI. DR: MS. R. ANITA, JCIT IT ITIT IT(TP) (TP)(TP) (TP)A NO A NO A NO A NOS SS S. .. .6 66 67 77 7/CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. 2 9 . 1325/CHNY/18 2014-15 SMT. SAMTA JAIN, NO. 501B, GEETANJALI APARTMENTS, NO. 15, 2 ND STREET, KELLYS, MEDAVAKKAM TANK ROAD, CHENNAI 600 010. [PAN: APFPS8818E] AR: SHRI D. ANAND, ADVOCATE ITO, NON CORPORATE WARD 10(2), CHENNAI. DR: MS. R. ANITA, JCIT 10. 1326/CHNY/18 2014-15 SMT. SHILPA JAIN, NO. 501B, GEETANJALI APARTMENTS, NO. 15, 2 ND STREET, KELLYS, MEDAVAKKAM TANK ROAD, CHENNAI 600 010. [PAN: AOSPS5838L] AR: SHRI D. ANAND, ADVOCATE ITO, NON CORPORATE WARD 10(3), CHENNAI. DR: MS. R. ANITA, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 05.01.2021 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.01.2021 / O R D E R PER BENCH: THIS BUNCH OF TEN APPEALS FILED BY DIFFERENT ASSESS EES/REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST ORDERS OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)/A.O., CHENNAI EVEN DATED 05.09.2018, 03.10.2016, 27.08.20 19, 01.10.2019, 30.05.2019, 30.05.2019(CO), 30.06.2017, 16.02.2018, 20.02.2018 AND 16.02.2018 FOR RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE COUNSELS FOR THE ASSESSEES AN D THE LD. DR AND ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AT THE TI ME OF HEARING, LEARNED COUNSELS FOR THE ASSESSEES HAVE MADE A STATEMENT A T BAR THAT THE ASSESSEES WANTS TO UTILIZE THE DIRECT TAXES VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME, 2020 TO SETTLE PENDING DISPUTE RELATING TO DIRECT TAXES AND IN THI S REGARD SOME OF ASSESSEES IT ITIT IT(TP) (TP)(TP) (TP)A NO A NO A NO A NOS SS S. .. .6 66 67 77 7/CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. 3 HAVE FILED FORM NO 1 AND 2 AND AWAITING FORM NO. 3 FROM THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY. IN SOME CASES, THE ASSESSEES HAVE RECEI VED FORM NO. 3 FROM THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY AND IN SOME CASES, THE ASSESSE E HAVE FILED LETTER AND EXPRESSED THEIR WILLINGNESS TO FILE FORM NO. 1 AND 2 BEFORE THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY. 3. THE BENCH HAS CONSIDERED RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BO TH SIDES AND AFTER HEARING BOTH PARTIES, WE FOUND THAT THE GOVERNMEN T OF INDIA HAS ANNOUNCED IN THE BUDGET, 2020, A DIRECT TAXES VIVAD SE VISHW AS SCHEME, 2020 TO SETTLE PENDING DISPUTE RELATING TO DIRECT TAXES AT VARIOUS APPELLATE FORUMS INCLUDING THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, TRIBUNAL , HIGH COURT AND SUPREME COURT. IN THIS REGARD, THE SCHEME HAS BEEN NOTIFIED ON 17TH MARCH, 2020 AND BECAME DIRECT TAXES VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT, 2020. A S PER THE SAID SCHEME, ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED TO SETTLE DIRECT TAX DISPUTE IN A MANNER AND PROCEDURE PRESCRIBED THEREIN BY FILING NECESSARY DECLARATION AND UNDERTAKING. THE SCHEME HAS ALSO SPECIFIED THE AMOUNT OF TAXES, INTE REST, AND PENALTY, IF ANY PAYABLE UNDER THE ACT. IF AN ASSESSEE FILED A DEC LARATION AND PAY SPECIFIED TAXES AS PER THE SCHEME AND WITHDRAW THE APPEA L PENDING BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES, THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY S HALL PASS AN ORDER IN FORM 5 CONFIRMING PAYMENT MADE UNDER THE SCHEME AND GRA NT IMMUNITY FROM PENALTY AND PROSECUTION. IT ITIT IT(TP) (TP)(TP) (TP)A NO A NO A NO A NOS SS S. .. .6 66 67 77 7/CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. 4 4. IN THESE PRESENT APPEALS, SOME ASSESSEES HAVE F ILED DECLARATION IN FORM NO.1 ALONG WITH UNDERTAKING WAIVING RIGHTS FOR ANY REMEDY IN FORM NO. 2 TO THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY AND HAS ALSO RECEIVED FORM 3. IN SOME CASES, FORM NO 1 AND 2 HAS BEEN FILED AND AWAITING FORM NO . 3 FROM THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY AND IN SOME CASES, THE ASSESSEES HAVE EX PRESSED THEIR WILLINGNESS TO FILE FORM NO. 1 AND 2 AND SETTLE THEIR DISPUTE U NDER THE SCHEME. THEREFORE, ONCE THE ASSESSEES INTEND TO FILE A DECLARATION IN FORM NO.1 ALONG WITH UNDERTAKING AND EXPRESSED THEIR WILLINGNESS TO SETT LE PENDING DISPUTES REGARDING DIRECT TAXES, THEN THERE IS NO POINT IN K EEPING APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEES. WE, FURTHER NOTED THAT RECENTLY THE H ONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF MADRAS HAS CONSIDERED AN IDENTICAL APPLIC ATION FILED BY AN ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF M/S. NANNUSAMY MOHAN (HUF ) VS. ACIT IN T.C.A NO.372 OF 2020 FOR AVAILING THE BENEFIT OF VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME, 2020, WHERE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS DISMISSED THE AP PEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS WITHDRAWN, BUT ALLOWED LIBERTY TO THE ASSESSEE TO RESTORE THE APPEAL IN THE EVENT THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY FOR ANY REASON REJE CT APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE ACT. THE RELEVANT P ORTIONS OF THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS VIDE ORDER DATE D 16.10.2020 ARE EXTRACTED AS UNDER:- IT ITIT IT(TP) (TP)(TP) (TP)A NO A NO A NO A NOS SS S. .. .6 66 67 77 7/CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. 5 2. WE HAVE HEARD MR.M.P.SENTHIL KUMAR, LEARNED C OUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE APPELLANT/ASSESSEE AND MR.T.R.SENTHIL KUMAR, LEA RNED SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL AND MS. K.G.USHA RANI, LEARNED COUNSEL FO R THE RESPONDENT/REVENUE. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT / ASSESSEE , ON INSTRUCTIONS, SUBMITTED THAT THE APPELLANT / ASSESSEE INTENDS TO AVAIL THE BENEFIT OF VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME ( VVS SCHEME' FOR BREVITY) AND IN THIS REGA RD, THE ASSESSEE IS TAKING STEPS TO FILE THE APPLICATION / DECLARATION IN FORM NO. 1. 4. IT MAY NOT BE NECESSARY FOR THIS COURT TO DECIDE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW FRAMED FOR CONSIDERATION ON ACCOUNT OF CERTAIN SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENTS. THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ENACTED THE DIRECT TAX VIVA D SE VISHWAS ACT, 2020 (ACT 3 OF 2020) TO PROVIDE FOR RESOLUTION OF DISPUT ED TAX AND FOR MATTERS CONNECTED THEREWITH OR INCIDENTAL THERETO. THE ACT OF THE PARLIAMENT RECEIVED THE ASSENT OF THE PRESIDENT ON 17TH MARCH 2020 AND PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF INDIA ON 17TH 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 DIFFER ENT 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 SE CTION 2(J) 'DISPUTED TAX' HAS BEEN DEFINED. IN TERMS OF SECTION 3, WHERE A DE CLARANT MEANS A PERSON, WHO FILES A DECLARATION UNDER SECTION 4 ON OR BEFORE TH E LAST DATE FILES A DECLARATION TO THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 4 IN RESPECT OF TAX ARREARS, THEN, NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTH ING CONTAINED IN THE INCOME TAX ACT OR ANY OTHER LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORC E, 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 C ASE 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 PAYABL E SHALL BE ONE-HALF OF THE AMOUNT IN THE TABLE STIPULATED IN SECTION 3 CALCULA TED ON SUCH ISSUE, IN SUCH A MANNER AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED. THE SECOND PROVISO DEA LS WITH THE CASES, WHERE THE MATTER IS BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) OR BEFORE THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL. THE THIRD PROVISO DEALS WITH CASE S, WHERE THE ISSUE IS PENDING BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. THE FILI NG OF THE DECLARATION IS AS PER SECTION 4 OF THE ACT AND THE PARTICULARS TO BE FURN ISHED ARE ALSO MENTIONED IN THE SUB SECTIONS OF SECTION 4. SECTION 5 OF THE ACT DEA LS WITH THE TIME AND MANNER OF THE PAYMENT AND SECTION 6 DEALS WITH IMMUNITY FROM INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS IN RESPECT OF OFFENCE AND IMPOSITION OF PENALTY IN CER TAIN CASES. SECTION 9 OF THE ACT DEALS 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 DECLARATIO N TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE SAID ACT IS NOT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. IF SUCH A PRAYER IT ITIT IT(TP) (TP)(TP) (TP)A NO A NO A NO A NOS SS S. .. .6 66 67 77 7/CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. 6 IS MADE, THE REGISTRY SHALL ENTERTAIN THE PRAYER WI THOUT INSISTING UPON ANY APPLICATION TO BE FILED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN RESTORATION OF THE APPEAL AND ON SUCH REQUEST MADE BY THE ASSESSEE BY FILING A MI SCELLANEOUS PETITION FOR RESTORATION, THE REGISTRY SHALL PLACE SUCH PETITION BEFORE THE DIVISION BENCH FOR ORDERS. 8. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE, WE DIRECT THE APPE LLANT / ASSESSEE TO FILE THE FORM NO.1 ON OR BEFORE 20.11.2020 AND THE COMPETENT AUTH ORITY SHALL PROCESS THE APPLICATION / DECLARATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AC T AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE PREFERABLY WITH IN A PERIOD OF SIX (6) WEEKS FROM THE DATE ON WHICH THE DECLARATION IS FILED IN THE PROPER FORM. 5. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DECISION OF THE HONBL E HIGH COURT OF MADRAS, AND BY TAKING NOTE OF THE FACT THAT SOME ASSESSE ES HAVE ALREADY FILED DECLARATION IN FORM NO.1 ALONG WITH FORM NO.2 TO TH E DESIGNATED AUTHORITY AND RECEIVED FORM 3 AND SOME ASSESSEES HAD ALREA DY FILED FORM NO 1 & 2 AND AWAITING FORM NO. 3 FROM THE DESIGNATED AUTHORI TY AND ALSO THE FACT THAT REMAINING ASSESSEES ARE WILLING TO FILE FORM NO 1 AND 2 WITHIN THE DUE DATE PRESCRIBED FOR THIS PURPOSE, WE DISMISS THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES AS WITHDRAWN. HOWEVER, A LIBERTY IS GIVEN TO THE A SSESSEES TO RESTORE THE APPEALS, IN THE EVENT OF THE DESIGNATED AUTHORIT Y, FOR ANY REASON REJECT THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 4 O F THE SAID ACT. WE, FURTHER MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IN A CASES WHERE THE APPEAL IS F ILED BY THE REVENUE AND THE ASSESSEES HAVE FOR ANY REASON OPTED OUT FROM THE S CHEME OR THE APPLICANTS UNDER THE SCHEME MISREPRESENTS ANY FACTS WHICH RESU LTED IN REJECTION OF APPLICATION FILED UNDER THE SCHEME, THEN THE PROVIS IONS OF SECTION 4(6) OF THE ACT, SHALL BE APPLICABLE TO ALL APPEALS AND IN SUCH CASES, ALL THE PROCEEDINGS IT ITIT IT(TP) (TP)(TP) (TP)A NO A NO A NO A NOS SS S. .. .6 66 67 77 7/CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. /CHNY/18 & ORS. 7 AND CLAIMS WHICH WERE WITHDRAWN UNDER SECTION 4 AND ALL THE CONSEQUENCES UNDER THE INCOME-TAX ACT AGAINST THE DECLARANT SHAL L BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN REVIVED. WE, FURTHER MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSE ES SHOULD PROMPTLY INFORM THE ASSESSING OFFICER ABOUT THEIR DECISION TO OPT O UT OF THE SCHEME OR REJECTION OF APPLICATION BY THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY TO THE A SSESSING OFFICER, SO AS TO ENABLE TO FILE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION TO RESTORE THE APPEAL. 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS/CO FILED BY THE A SSESSEE ARE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 05 TH JANUARY, 2021 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (S JAYARAMAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (DUVVURUL RL REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 05.01.2021 VM/- ) * /COPY TO: 1. , /APPELLANT, 2. )-, / RESPONDENT, 3. . ( )/CIT(A), 4. . /CIT, 5. ) /DR & 6. 1 /GF.
