Case Number: ITA 1102/DEL/2020
Appellant: Suraj Dureja, Panipat
Respondent: ITO WARD – 4, Panipat
Assessment Year: 2011-12
Result: Final Tribunal Order
Case Filed On: 2020-03-17
Date of Order: 2021-07-06
Pronounced On: 2021-07-06
This case pertains to the resolution of a tax dispute for the assessment year 2011-12 involving Suraj Dureja, Panipat, and the Income Tax Officer (ITO) Ward – 4, Panipat, through the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme (VSV) Act, 2020. The primary issue in this appeal was whether the tax dispute could be resolved under the VSV scheme, leading to the withdrawal of the appeal.
Suraj Dureja, Panipat, filed an appeal against the order dated 19/12/2019 passed by CIT(A)-Karnal, relating to the assessment year 2011-12. The appellant sought to resolve the pending issue through the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme (VSV) Act, 2020, and subsequently filed Declaration Form No. 1 and Undertaking Form No. 2 under the scheme, receiving Form No. 3 from the department.
The ITO Ward – 4, Panipat, maintained that the tax demand for the assessment year 2011-12 was justified and should be upheld. The Assessing Officer had previously passed an order raising a tax demand against Suraj Dureja, which was subsequently challenged by the appellant in the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Karnal upheld the tax demand raised by the Assessing Officer. The appellant then filed an appeal before the ITAT, seeking relief from the tax demand for the assessment year 2011-12.
During the proceedings before the ITAT, the appellant submitted that they had opted for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme to resolve the tax dispute. The key points discussed were:
Appellant: None
Department: Shri R. K. Gupta, Sr. D.R.
The appellant moved an application stating that they had opted for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and had filed Declaration Form No. 1 and Undertaking Form No. 2 under the scheme. The appellant also received Form No. 3 from the department, indicating that the tax dispute was in the process of being resolved under the VSV scheme. The appellant requested the withdrawal of the appeal in light of the ongoing resolution process.
The learned Departmental Representative conceded to the submissions made by the appellant, acknowledging the appellant’s decision to opt for the VSV scheme to resolve the tax dispute.
The Tribunal analyzed the submissions and verified the application and forms filed under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The key findings were:
Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by Suraj Dureja as withdrawn.
The ITAT concluded that the tax dispute for the assessment year 2011-12 involving Suraj Dureja and ITO Ward – 4, Panipat, was in the process of being resolved under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. As a result, the appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed as withdrawn, with the provision that the appellant could reinstitute the appeal if the dispute was not resolved under the VSV scheme.
Order pronounced in the open court on 6th July 2021 by Anil Chaturvedi, Accountant Member.
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform