VIMAL KUMAR GARG,JAIPUR V. ITO WD 4(3), JPR, JAIPUR

ITA 1351/JPR/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Shri Vimal Kumar Garg against the order of the CIT(A), which was dismissed as withdrawn for statistical purposes. The dismissal was based on the assumption that the assessee had complied with the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. However, the assessee contended that due to technical glitches, he could not download Form 3, essential for further compliance under the scheme, leading to a delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal acknowledged the technical glitches and the partial payments made by the assessee, which were within the spirit of the scheme, albeit not fully compliant with the deadlines. The Tribunal's decision to allow the appeal and restore the case to the CIT(A) was based on the principle of providing a fair adjudication and recognizing the efforts made by the assessee to comply with the tax payment requirements under the scheme.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 28532 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM SINGH CHOUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR KABRA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Bonafide belief
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

" vk;djvihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqjU;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,’’SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf;dlnL; ,oaJhjkBksMdeys'kt;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihyla-@ITA No.1351/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.ko\"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2015-16 Shri Vimal Kumar Garg 33, Bandhu Nagar, Murlipura Jaipur – 302 012 cuke Vs. The ITO Ward 4(3) Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AEGPG 3109 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Rajesh Kumar Kabra, CA jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 12/03/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: : 17/03/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 26-07-2022, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2015-16 raising the grounds appeal as mentioned at Form 36. 2.1 During the course of hearing, the Bench noticed that there is delay of 776 days in filing the appeal for which the assessee vide application dated 2 ITA NO.1351/JP/2024 SHRI VIMAL KUMAR GARG VS ITO, WARD 4(3), JAIPUR 14-11-2024 filed an application for condonation delay with following prayers. ‘’The Appellant, Vimal Kumar Garg, respectfully submits this application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before this Hon'ble Tribunal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jaipur, under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the case of Vimal Kumar Garg, for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The grounds of the appeal have already been set out in the attached Form 36. 1. That the order under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2015-16 was passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Jaipur, on 26.07.2022. 2. That the appeal before this Hon'ble Tribunal is required to be filed within 60 days from the receipt of the order, i.e., on or before 24.09.2022. 3. That there has been a delay of approximately [Number of Days] days in filing this appeal before your Honours, and the appeal is being filed beyond the prescribed period. 4. That the delay was due to the following bona fide reasons: -The Appellant had applied for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, and filed Forms 1 and 2 on 01.12.2020, with the assistance of his Chartered Accountant. However, due to technical glitches-in the portal, Form 3 could not be downloaded, which is required for further compliance under the scheme. -In good faith, the Appellant deposited the tax amount of Rs. 2,64,869.00 on 26.10.2021 (within the due date) under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, despite the non-availability of Form 3. Upon receiving Form 3, the Appellant realized that there was a shortfall in the payment and paid the balance of Rs. 1,42,816.00 on 26.04.2022 (after the extended due date). -Prior to filing Form 4, the Appellant had requested the CIT(A) for withdrawal of the appeal on 27.10.2021, and the withdrawal was allowed on 26.07.2022 under the mistaken belief that the Appellant had fully complied with the requirements of the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. - Despite the Appellant's bona fide compliance, Form 5 under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme has not been issued, nor has any rejection order been passed. This has caused significant confusion, and the Appellant was under the bona fide belief that his appeal had been disposed of as per the scheme, which led to the delay in filing the present appeal. 3 ITA NO.1351/JP/2024 SHRI VIMAL KUMAR GARG VS ITO, WARD 4(3), JAIPUR 5. That the delay in filing this appeal is purely due to the circumstances beyond the control of the Appellant and the bonafide belief that the matter had been resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. 6. That the Appellant has not filed any other appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), and the matter is still pending for resolution. 7. That the Appellant submits that there was no malafide intention or deliberate delay on his part in filing the present appeal, and the delay has occurred solely due to the bona fide reasons as mentioned above. 8. That the Appellant humbly submits that the delay in filing the appeal was unintentional, and the matter requires a fair adjudication on merit. 9. That the Appellant respectfully prays before this Hon'ble Tribunal to condone the delay in filing the appeal and allow the appeal to be heard on its merits. 10. That in support of this application, the Appellant has filed an Affidavit duly affirming the facts and circumstances leading to the delay, which is annexed herewith. In view of the above, it is respectfully prayed that your Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to: 1. Condone the delay in filing the appeal before this Hon'ble Tribunal. 2. Allow the appeal to be heard on its merits. 3. Pass such other order or direction as may be deemed fit and proper in the present case.’’ To this effect the assessee has filed an affidavit deposing the above facts in his case. 2.2 On the other hand, the ld. DR objected to such inordinate delay but submitted that the Court may decide the issue as deemed fit and proper in the case. 4 ITA NO.1351/JP/2024 SHRI VIMAL KUMAR GARG VS ITO, WARD 4(3), JAIPUR 2.3 After hearing both the parties and the perusing the materials available on record, the Bench noticed that there is valid reason and because of which the assessee was prevented in filing the appeal before the ITAT. In this view of the matter, the delay is condoned. 3.1 At the outset of hearing of the appeal, the Bench noticed that the ld. CIT(A) at para 2 of his order dismissed the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn for statistical purpose giving therein following narration. ‘’2. During appellate proceedings, as per details available onrecord, it is noted that Form3 under Direct Taxes Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 dated 25-03-2021 has been issued by designated authority i.e. the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-2 for A.Y. under consideration covering captioned appeal. Since appellant has opted to avail of benefits of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, and appellant done all payment as directed in Form 3, this payment is seen in Form 4. Present appeal is deemed to have been withdrawn. As a result, appeal is dismissed as withdrawn for statistical purpose.’’ 3.2 During the course of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee prayed that the assessee had applied for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and filed Forms 1 and 2 on 01-12-2020 and due to technical glitches on the portal, Form 3 could not be downloaded and submitted that Form 3 was not available on the portal, the assessee in good faith deposited the tax 5 ITA NO.1351/JP/2024 SHRI VIMAL KUMAR GARG VS ITO, WARD 4(3), JAIPUR amount of Rs.2,64,869/- on 26-10-2021 (within due date) under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 in order to comply with the Scheme’s tax payment requirement. However, the assessee could not file Form 4 on the portal due to non-availability of Form 3. The ld AR further submitted that when the Form 3 made available on the portal then the assessee realized that a short payment of Rs.1,42,816/- had been made and this balance /short payment was to be made on 26-04-2022 (after the extended due date for payment under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme) and thus the Form No. 4 was filed on 17-05-2022. The ld. AR further submitted that the assessee had requested for withdrawal of the appeal with the ld. CIT(A) on 27-10-2021 who wrongly allowed the withdrawal of the appeal on 26-07-22 concluding that the assessee had complied with the requirement of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The ld. AR further submitted that the ld. CIT(A) relied on the issuance of Form 3 to the assessee and the filing of Form 4 after the tax payment. Thus the ld. CIT(A) decided the issue without verifying the full payment of tax has been made or not and the ld. CIT(A) passed the order under the bona fide belief that Form 5 would be issued to the assessee. However, neither Form 5 had been issued to the assessee nor any rejection order has been passed till date. Thus, neither any appeal is pending before the ld. CIT(A) nor Form 5 under the Vivad Se Vishwas 6 ITA NO.1351/JP/2024 SHRI VIMAL KUMAR GARG VS ITO, WARD 4(3), JAIPUR Scheme, 2020 had been issued to the assessee which kept the matter still in abeyance. Thus the Bench is requested to allow the benefit of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 to the assessee because of technical glitches and no fault from the side the of the assessee in spite of deposit of all the taxes applicable on the date of settlement of the Scheme 2020. 3.3 On the other hand, the ld. DR did not raise any objection to the submissions made by the ld. AR of the assessee before the Bench and supported the submissions of the assessee keeping in view that clear cut settlement of due taxes was deposited by the assessee and this thing has happened because of technical glitches. However, for the sake of convenience, the ld. DR has filed reply/ report received from Income Tax Officer (Tech.) O/o PCIT-2, Jaipur Vide letter No. 2 dated 6-03-2025 whose contents are as under:- OFFICE OF THE PRCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Das Road, JAIPUR So. PCIT-2/ITO/TechI/JPR/2024-25/619 Date 06.03.2025 To The AddL CIT (Sr.DR-III) ITAT, Jaipur Sub Appeal matter pending before the Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur in the case of Vimal Kumar Garg (PAN AEGPG3109Q) V/s ITO, Ward-4(1), jaipur ITA No. 1351/JPR/2024 for the A.Y. 2015-16-regarding 7 ITA NO.1351/JP/2024 SHRI VIMAL KUMAR GARG VS ITO, WARD 4(3), JAIPUR Kindly refers to your email dated 04 03 2025 on the above mentioned subject In this connection, 1 am directed to state that Form-3 was issued to the assessee on dated 31.12.2020, wherein amount payable on or before 31.03.2021 was Rs 3,50,444/- and amount payable after 31.03.2021 was Rs. 3,99,601/-. Later on vide notification no. 3847(E) (No. 85/2020, F.No IT(A)/1/2020-TPL), the last date for payment without any additional amount) was extended to 30.09.2021 and the last date /outer limit for payment (with additional amount) was 31.10.2021. The assesse had deposited the amount of Rs 2,64,869/-on dated 26.10.2021 and amount of Rs 1,42,816/-on dated 26.04.2022 which was after the prescribed date of payment as per VSVS scheme 2020. Therefore, the form-5 in the case of sh. Vimal Kumar Garg was not issued. An E-mail was also sent to e-filing web manager requesting to clarify the issue or suggest the solution on dated 7-12- 2022. The reply from e-filing web manager is still awaited. Submitted for your necessary action भवदȣय, Sd/- हंसराजͧसंघल आयकरअͬधकारȣ(तक) क ृतेĤधानआयुÈत 2 जयपुर 3.4 After hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record and the prayer as made by the ld. AR of the assessee above, the Bench feels that the assessee should not be suffered from such technical glitches that prevail at the side of revenue. As is clear that there were technical glitches and considering that aspect of the matter the assessee has deposited the part payment of tax dispute even though the form no. 3 was not issued and served to the assessee. The bench noted that though the Form no. 3 placed on record has date 31.12.2020 but the same was served on 23.03.21 i.e. almost a year[ based on the copy of the form no. 3 filed by the ld. DR]. The assessee paid Rs. 2,64,869/- on 26.10.2021 and 8 ITA NO.1351/JP/2024 SHRI VIMAL KUMAR GARG VS ITO, WARD 4(3), JAIPUR Rs. 1,42,816/- on 26.04.2022. The second date of payment was after the extended due date and thereby the assessee the assessee’s dispute was not settled down. This fact is confirmed by a letter dated 06.03.2025 filed by ITO, HQ, PCIT-2, Jaipur. That letter also confirms that they have escalated the issue with the technical team and reply from the web manager awaited. Thus, the bench appreciate the effort of the revenue but at the same time the assessee alternatively argued that the present scheme of VSVS 2024is extended arms of that scheme of 2020 and therefore, if the revenue could not resolve that dispute in the scheme of 2020 then the benefit of the present scheme be given to the assessee by the concerned PCIT by passing a order in that 2020 scheme and thereby the assessee may avail the scheme 2024 for which the assessee is also alternatively eligible. Based on these discussion we hold that the assessee be given the benefit of resolving the dispute of Vivad se Vishwas scheme either in 2020 or 2024. Since this matter is time barring the copy of the order be placed before the ld. PCIT’s office immediately so as to the assessee be given benefit as discussed herein above. In the meantime, since the appeal was dismissed by ld. CIT(A) in incorrect appreciation of facts, the same is also directed to restore to the file of the ld. CIT(A) so as to avail the benefit of the new Scheme by the assessee. 9 ITA NO.1351/JP/2024 SHRI VIMAL KUMAR GARG VS ITO, WARD 4(3), JAIPUR 4.0. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated hereinabove. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 17 -03-2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh ½ ¼jkBksMdeys'kt;UrHkkbZ ½ (Dr. S. Seethalakshmi) (Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai) U;kf;dlnL;@Judicial Member ys[kklnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 17/03/2025 *Mishra vkns'k dh izfrfyfivxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- ShriVimal Kumar Garg, Jaipur 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward 4 (1), Jaipur 3. vk;djvk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;djvihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 5. xkMZQkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 1351/JP/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;diathdkj@Asst. Registrar "