Mahesh Goud Voruganti , Nizamabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Nizamabad

MA 52/Hyd/2023

AI Insights

The case involves a Miscellaneous Application filed by the petitioner, Sri Mahesh Goud Voruganti, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 20.01.2021, which pertained to the Assessment Year 2013-14. The petitioner sought to recall or modify the Tribunal's earlier order under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, citing financial constraints that prevented the deposit of the tax amount specified in Form No. 3 under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Departmental Representative opposed the application on grounds of timeliness and procedural compliance with the Vivad Se Vishwas Act. The Tribunal dismissed the application, emphasizing the mandatory dismissal of appeals upon the issuance of Form No. 3 and the procedural bar due to the lapse of the six-month period for filing such applications.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 122294 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 06-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 14-06-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K. HANMANDLOO
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “SMC”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. The present Miscellaneous Application is filed by the petitioner / revenue aggrieved by the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal dt.20.01.2021 in ITA No.37/Hyd/2020 for A.Y. 2013 seeking to recall or modify the said order u/s 254(2) of the Act. MA No.52/Hyd/2023 in ITA 37/Hyd/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sri Mahesh Goud Voruganti, Nizamabad. PAN : AFYPV8029F Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 3, Nizamabad. (Petitioner/ Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by: Sri K. Hanmandloo Assessee by : Sri K.P.R.R. Murthy Date of hearing: 07.07.2023 Date of pronouncement: 11.07.2023 M.A.No.52/Hyd/2023 2 2. Before me, the learned Atuthorized Representative submitted that the respondent/ Revenue had received Form No.3 under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, asking the assessee to deposit the tax amount mentioned in the certificate. However, the petitioner claimed that he was not able to deposit the amount due to lack of funds. Therefore, the petitioner/assessee filed the present application to recall the order. 3. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative argued that the application of the petitioner is not acceptable on two counts: (1) the application of the petitioner / assessee was filed beyond a period of six months from the date of the pronouncement of order, and (2) as per the provisions of the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, the appeal is required to be dismissed if Form No.3 was issued by the department. 4. In rebuttal, the learned Authorized Representative submitted that the appeal may be restored since the petitioner / assessee was prevented from depositing the amount due to financial constraints. Furthermore, he pointed that Form No. 3 was issued by the department only on 04.01.2021 and it was received on 11.04.2023. 5. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. As per the order dated 21.01.2021, liberty was granted to the petitioner to approach the Tribunal through an application under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme in case, the application is dismissed by the Revenue. The relevant Paragraph of the Tribunal’s order reads as under : M.A.No.52/Hyd/2023 3 “4. After hearing both the parties, according to the request of the assessee and its Ld.AR, I hereby allow the appeal of the assessee to be withdrawn. I also make it clear that the assessee shall be at liberty to approach the ITA No.37/Hyd./2020 Sri Mahesh Goud Voruganti AY 2013-14 Tribunal within the stipulated time as provided under the Act, in order to reinstate the appeal, if the application with respect to Vivad se Vishwas Scheme is rejected.” 6. In the present case, the application of the petitioner was not rejected; rather, it was approved by the order dated 31 st March 2021. Furthermore, the application was moved by the petitioner after a period of six months from the date of the order on 20 th January 2021. 7. In view of the above, the miscellaneous application filed by the petitioner is not maintainable as the time granted for rectification, as per section 254(2), is within six months and the order was passed by the Tribunal on 20.01.2021 does not suffer from any error. Even otherwise, Sections 3 and 5 under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2021 provides mandatory dismissal of appeal on issuance of Form No. 3. 8. In view of the aforementioned, I do not find any merit in the application filed by the petitioner. Accordingly, the application of the petitioner is dismissed as not maintainable. M.A.No.52/Hyd/2023 4 9. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the petitioner / assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 11 th July, 2023. Sd/- /- (LALIET KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 11 th July, 2023. TYNM/sps Copy to: S.No Addresses 1 Sri Mahesh Goud Voruganti, C/o Hanmandloo & Co., Chartered Accountants, Flat 404, Mount Nasir Apartments, beside Ravindra Bharathi, Saifabad, Hyderabaad - 500 004. 2 The ITO, Ward – 3, Nizamabad. 3 PCIT – 5, Hyderabad. 3 DR, ITAT Hyderabad Benches 4 Guard File //By order //