Anil Rajaram Buchde, Pune V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir-2, Pune, Pune

ITA 864/PUN/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Anil Rajaram Buchde, the appellant, contesting an order from the CIT(A), Pune-11, which dismissed his appeal against a rectification order under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The dispute centers on the inclusion of Rs.2,87,15,000 as Short Term Capital Gains in the assessment year 2014-15, which the appellant sought to rectify. The CIT(A) had previously dismissed the appeal as the assessment had attained finality under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adequately addressed the merits of the rectification application and thus restored the matter for a detailed examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 137049 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 24-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 27-07-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 154; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A” : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GD PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.864/PUN/2023 Assessment Year 2014-2015 Shri Anil Rajaram Buchde, AP Marunji, S.No.32, Tal. Mulshi, Near Kirti Classique, Pune – 411 057. Maharashtra. PAN BHKPB4666F vs. The ACIT, Circle-2, Room No.106, ‘B’ Wing, 1 st Floor, PMT Commercial Complex, Shankarshet Road, Swargate, Pune. Maharashtra. 411037 (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Neelesh Khandelwal For Revenue : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of Hearing : 25.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 29.08.2023 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014- 2015, arises against the CIT(A), Pune-11, Pune’s Din and Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1053353290(1), dated 31.05.2023, involving proceedings u/s.154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. The assessee pleads the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal : 2 I.T.A.No.864/PUN./2023 1. “On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions and scheme of the Act it be held that the Hon’ble Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals) erred in holding that the appeal filed by the Appellant against order u/s. 154 of the Act is redundant. The Appellant be granted just and proper relief in this respect. [Rs.81,58,270/-] 2. Without prejudice to Ground no. 1 and on facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions and scheme of the Act it be held that the Hon’ble Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the decision of the Learned Assessing Officer in rejecting the rectification application filed by the Appellant. It be held that that the amount of Short Term Capital Gains offered to tax during the AY 2014-15 in its return of income deserves to be reduced by Rs.2,87,15,000/-. The Appellant be granted just and proper relief in this respect. [Rs.81,58,270/-]. 3. The Appellant prays to be allowed to add, amend, modify, rectify, delete, raise any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.” 3. Suffice to say, it emerges during the course of hearing that the CIT(A)'s detailed discussion in question has rejected the assessee’s lower appeal in sec.154 rectification proceedings as under : 3 I.T.A.No.864/PUN./2023 “6. I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions made by the appellant. Briefly stated, the grievance of the appellant is that an amount of Rs.2,87,15,000/- has been inadvertently offered in the return of income filed for A.Y. 2014-15 and same is required to be reduced from the income assessed. In this connection, it is seen from the records available in this office that the appellant had filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against the assessment order dated 31/12/2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act for A.Y. 2014-15. During the pendency of appeal, the appellant preferred to file application under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and the said application was approved by the competent authority. Form-3 under VSV Scheme, for A.Y. 2014-15 was issued on 28/12/2020 and Form-5 was issued on 26/10/2021 by acknowledging the due payment of tax amount specified in Form-3. In this manner, the assessment for A.Y. 2014-15 has attained finality at an income of Rs.4,81,12,170/-, which was assessed vide order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 31/12/2016. The request of the appellant vide rectification application is, to reduce the said assessed income of Rs.4,81,12,170/-. Since the income assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act has attained finality under VSV Scheme, therefore, the present appeal u/s 154 of the Act has become redundant and 4 I.T.A.No.864/PUN./2023 cannot be adjudicated upon by the undersigned. Accordingly, the present appeal of the appellant is DISMISSED being redundant. 7. To conclude, the present appeal of the appellant for A.Y. 2014-15 is DISMISSED for statistical purposes.” 4. Mr. Khandelwal vehemently submitted during the course of hearing that the CIT(A) has simply brushed aside the assessee’s rectification pleadings thereby holding that he had already taken recourse to the settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020 instead having adjudicated the corresponding issues on merits. He next submitted that the assessee’s limited prayer at this stage seeks directions to the CIT(A) for appropriate adjudication of the matter u.sec.250(6) of the Act which has nowhere been done in the impugned former round. 5. Mr. Murkunde could hardly dispute that the CIT(A)'s foregoing detailed discussion has nowhere established the clear cut nexus between the assessee’s alleged settlement petition dealing with the very issue under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020 vis-à-vis relief claimed u/sec.154 rectification before us. We wish to clarify that the assessee’s stand before us is that he had sought to rectify the relevant apparent mistakes in the computation which nowhere formed part of the settlement under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2020’s 5 I.T.A.No.864/PUN./2023 settlement. Faced with the situation and without going into the merits of the issue, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to learned CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication as per law, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court on 29.08.2023. Sd/- Sd/- [GD PADMAHSHALI] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 29 th August, 2023 VBP/- Copy to 1. The applicant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A), Pune-11, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT (Central), Pune. 5. D.R. ITAT, Pune “A” Bench, Pune 6. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune. 6 I.T.A.No.864/PUN./2023 S.No. Details Date 1 Draft dictated on 25.08.2023 Sr.PS 2 Draft placed before author 28.08.2023 Sr.PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Author .08.2023 J.M. 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member .08.2023 A.M. 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS .08.2023 Sr.PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on .08.2023 Sr.PS 7 Date of uploading of Order .08.2023 Sr.PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk .08.2023 Sr.PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order