The case of Sumit Sharma, filed on February 5, 2019, revolves around the contentious issue of disallowance of travel expenses for the assessment year (AY) 2014-15. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Delhi Bench, through virtual conferencing, dismissed the appeal on November 20, 2020, as the appellant opted to settle the tax arrears under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
Sumit Sharma, a resident of Delhi and having PAN AXLPS0493F, filed his income tax return for AY 2014-15, declaring an income which later became a subject of scrutiny. The Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward – 60(2), New Delhi, disallowed certain travel expenses, leading to an increased taxable income.
The appellant challenged the disallowance of travel expenses, arguing that they were legitimate business expenditures. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] upheld the disallowance, prompting Sumit Sharma to appeal to the ITAT.
During the ITAT hearing on November 20, 2020, held through video conferencing, nobody appeared on behalf of the appellant. However, a letter dated November 7, 2020, was submitted by Sumit Sharma, requesting the withdrawal of his appeal as he opted to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
The Tribunal, comprising Vice President G.S. Pannu and Judicial Member Amit Shukla, accepted the appellant’s request for withdrawal. The Learned Senior Departmental Representative (DR) had no objection to the withdrawal.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, acknowledging the appellant’s choice to resolve the dispute through the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
This case highlights the importance of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, as a mechanism for taxpayers to settle their disputes with the Income Tax Department. The scheme provides an opportunity to resolve long-standing disputes by paying a certain percentage of the disputed tax, thereby reducing litigation and fostering a more efficient tax administration system.
For taxpayers, this decision serves as a reminder to consider alternative dispute resolution mechanisms offered by the government, which can save time and resources otherwise spent in prolonged litigation.
The final order was pronounced on November 20, 2020, during the virtual hearing, with the appeal of the assessee dismissed as withdrawn.
The case of Sumit Sharma against the ITO Ward – 60(2), New Delhi, underscores the significance of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme in resolving tax disputes and highlights the procedural aspects of withdrawing appeals in the ITAT.
Sumit Sharma, residing at AA-39, Priyadarshni Vihar, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092.
Income Tax Officer, Ward – 60(2), New Delhi.
Final Tribunal Order
2014-15
November 20, 2020
November 20, 2020
The appeal was filed against the order of the learned CIT(A)-37, New Delhi, dated January 7, 2019. The appellant sought relief from the adhoc disallowance of travel expenses, which he argued were incurred for legitimate business purposes. The withdrawal of the appeal under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, signifies the appellant’s preference for a more expedient resolution over prolonged litigation.
The decision to withdraw the appeal under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme demonstrates the practical approach taken by the appellant in resolving tax disputes. This case serves as an example of how alternative dispute resolution schemes can effectively reduce the burden of litigation on both taxpayers and the tax administration.
The Tribunal’s acceptance of the withdrawal and the absence of any objections from the Departmental Representative further underscore the cooperative nature of this resolution process.
The Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, introduced by the Government of India, aims to provide a quick and amicable settlement of pending tax disputes. Under this scheme, taxpayers can settle their disputes by paying a specified percentage of the disputed tax, thereby avoiding lengthy court battles and reducing the burden on the judicial system.
This case illustrates the scheme’s effectiveness in providing relief to taxpayers and streamlining the resolution of tax disputes. By opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, Sumit Sharma was able to resolve his tax dispute efficiently, without further litigation.
The case of Sumit Sharma vs ITO Ward – 60(2), Delhi, thus serves as a testament to the potential benefits of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for taxpayers seeking to resolve their disputes in a timely and cost-effective manner.
Sumit Sharma vs ITO Ward – 60(2), Delhi: 2014-15 – Appeal on Travel Expense Disallowance
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