Understanding the ITA No.851/Del/2022 – Santosh vs. ITO, Rohtak Judgment

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment in the case of Santosh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Rohtak, holding significant implications for tax jurisprudence, provides a comprehensive understanding of the adjudication process and the principles applied. This article delves into the nuances of the case, breaking down the legal arguments, the tribunal’s observations, and the final decision to grant relief to the appellant.

Background of the Case

The appellant, Santosh, filed an appeal against the order dated 01.04.2022 in Appeal No. CIT(A), Rohtak 10177/2019-20 for the assessment year 2011-12, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi. The appeal arose out of an assessment order dated 28/11/2018 under sections 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, passed by the ITO, Ward-4, Rohtak.

In her appeal, Santosh challenged the decision of the NFAC, alleging errors in the processing and disposal of her appeal, especially the incorrect application of the ‘Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme’ without her consent and submission of the required form. The appeal highlighted the disregard of factual circumstances and the legal rights of the appellant, posing serious questions on the validity of the appellate order.

Grounds of Appeal

• The appellate order erroneously applied the ‘Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme’ despite no submission of Form No.1 by the appellant.
• The appellate authority misjudged facts and law by basing its decision on incorrect facts, particularly regarding the appellant’s non-participation in the ‘Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme’.
• The order erroneously noted the appellant’s supposed voluntary waiver of rights to pursue any remedy or claim related to the tax arrears.
• Incorrect observation by the CIT Appeals regarding th… [Article truncated due to word limit]

  Judgment Summary: ITA No.851/Del/2022 – Santosh vs. ITO, Rohtak