Birdichand Jawarilal-HUF, Chennai v. ITO NCE 7(1), Chennai

ITA 217/CHNY/2018 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 01-03-2021 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 21721714 RSA 2018
Assessee PAN AAACM4854B
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITA 217/CHNY/2018
Duration Of Justice 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 13 day(s)
Appellant Birdichand Jawarilal-HUF, Chennai
Respondent ITO NCE 7(1), Chennai
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 01-03-2021
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted D
Tribunal Order Date 01-03-2021
Last Hearing Date 01-03-2021
First Hearing Date 01-03-2021
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 17-01-2018
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D B ENCH CHENNAI . . & BEFORE SHRI V.DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S. NO ITA NO. ASSTT YEAR ASSESSEE /DEPARTMENT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY RESPONDENT BY 1 3240/CHNY/2016 2012-13 M/S. BARRY WEHMILLER INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD. TARAMANI TECHPARK 3 RD FLOOR SOUTH BLOCK SP.PLOT NO.16 TO 20A INNER RING ROAD GUINDY CHENNAI-32. PAN: AAACM 4854B ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE RANGE-1 CHENNAI. MR. SAROJ KUMAR PARIDA ADVOCATE MR. G.JOHNSON ADDL.CIT 2 217/CHNY/2018 2004-05 BIRDICHAND JAWARILAL(HUF) 89 G N G STREET AMBATTUR CHENNAI058. PAN: AAAHB 1077N INCOME TAX OFFICER NCW- 7(1) CHENNAI. MR. K.BALASUBRAMAN IAN ADVOCATE MR. G.JOHNSON ADDL.CIT 3-4 833/CHNY/2014 & 934/CHNY/2015 2009-10 2010-11 M/S. VESTAS WIND TECHNOLOGY INDIA PVT.LTD 298 RAJIV GANDHI SALAI SHOLINGANALLUR CHENNAI-119. PAN: AAACA 9279F ASSISTANT /DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX COMPANY CIRCLE-III(4) / 3(2) CHENNAI. NONE MR. G.JOHNSON ADDL.CIT 5 -7 70/CHNY/2018 2132/CHNY/2017 864/CHNY/2017 2013-14 2009-10 2012-13 M/S. REDINGTON (INDIA) LTD. SPL GUINDY HOUSE 95 MOUNT ROAD CHENNAI-32. PAN: AABCR 0347P DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(1) CHENNAI. MR. SAROJ KUMAR PARIDA ADVOCATE MR. G.JOHNSON ADDL.CIT 8 2628/CHNY/2019 2009-10 MR.A.R.DILLI BABU 111/30 ALAPAKKAM MAIN ROAD ALAPAKKAM CHENNAI- 116. PAN: AIEPD 0578J INCOME TAX OFFICER NON- CORPORATE WARD-8(4) CHENNAI. MR.D.PALANIVEL ADVOCATE MR. G.JOHNSON ADDL.CIT 9 303/CHNY/2020 2011-12 MR.DINESH KUMAR JAIN 36 CHALLANI PLAXA 2 ND FLOOR VEERAPPAN STREET SOWCARPET CHENNAI-1 PAN: AADPJ 3827H INCOME TAX OFFICER NON- CORPORATE WARD-4(3) CHENNAI. NONE MR. G.JOHNSON ADDL.CIT 10 3053/CHNY/2019 2012-13 SMT. POONAM DEVI 6/4B BADRIAH GARDEN LANE PARK TOWN CHENNAI-79. INCOME TAX OFFICER NON- CORPORATE WARD-5(4) NONE MR. G.JOHNSON ADDL.CIT 2 ITA NOS. 3240 /CHNY/2016 & 14 ORS. PAN:AAHPP 5096N CHENNAI. 11 3054/CHNY/2019 2012-13 SUSEELA DEVI 81 AUDIAPPA NAICKEN STREET SOWCARPET CHENNAI-79. PAN: ARRPS 7733E INCOME TAX OFFICER NON- CORPORATE WARD-6(3) CHENNAI. NONE MR. G.JOHNSON ADDL.CIT 12 3055/CHNY/2019 2012-13 MR.GANPATRAJ JAIN 81 AUDIAPPA NAICKEN STREET SOWCARPET CHENNAI-79. PAN: AAIPG 7981L INCOME TAX OFFICER NON- CORPORATE WARD-4(4) CHENNAI. NONE MR. G.JOHNSON ADDL.CIT 13 3056/CHNY/2019 2012-13 GANPATRAJ JAIN & SONS 81 AUDIAPPA NAICKEN STREET SOWCARPET CHENNAI-79. PAN: AACHG 5988B INCOME TAX OFFICER NON- CORPORATE WARD-4(4) CHENNAI. NONE MR. G.JOHNSON ADDL.CIT 14 3057/CHNY/2019 2012-13 MR.SUNIL KUMAR 19-20 RAMLAKHAN CHAMBERS GENERAL MUTHIA STREET SOWCARPET CHENNAI- 79. PAN: AAQPS 9489R INCOME TAX OFFICER NON- CORPORATE WARD-6(3) CHENNAI NONE MR. G.JOHNSON ADDL.CIT 15 3058/CHNY/2019 2012-13 SUNIL KUMAR & SONS (HUF) 19-20 RAMLAKHAN CHAMBERS GENERAL MUTHIA STREET SOWCARPET CHENNAI- 79. PAN: AAOHS 9626J INCOME TAX OFFICER NON- CORPORATE WARD-6(3) CHENNAI NONE MR. G.JOHNSON ADDL.CIT /DATE OF HEARING : 25.02.2021 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.03.2021 / O R D E R PER BENCH: THIS BUNCH OF 15 APPEALS FILED BY DIFFERENT ASSE SSEES ARE DIRECTED AGAINST ORDERS OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX (APPEALS) CHENNAI / DCIT/ ACIT. CHENNAI OF EVEN D ATED 29/09/2016 / 18.12.2017 / 04.02.2014 / 25.02.201 5 / 31.10.2017 / 31.05.2017/ 30.01.2017/ 24.06.2019 /12.09.2019/ 22 .08.2019 / 3 ITA NOS. 3240 /CHNY/2016 & 14 ORS. 19.09.2019 /24.09.2019/ 27.08.2019/ 22.08.2019 /22 .08.2019 FOR RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS. 2. WE FIND THAT APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IN ITA NO . 303/CHNY/2020 AT SR.NO.9 IS BARRED BY LIMITATION FOR WHICH NECESSARY PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY ALON G WITH AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY HAS BEEN FIL ED. THE LEARNED COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT FILE APP EAL WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED UNDER THE ACT THEREFORE DELAY MAY BE CONDONED. HAVING HEARD BOTH SIDES AND CONSIDERED THE PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY WE ARE OF THE CO NSIDERED VIEW THAT REASONS GIVEN BY ASSESSEE FOR NOT FILING TH E APPEAL WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED UNDER THE ACT COMES UNDER REASONABLE CAUSE AS PROVIDED UNDER THE ACT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY A ND HENCE DELAY IN FILING OF ABOVE APPEAL IS CONDONED AND APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEEE IS ADMITTED FOR ADJUDICATION. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE COUNSELS FOR THE ASSESSEES AN D THE LD. DR AND ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LEARNED COUNSELS FOR THE ASSESSEES HAV E MADE A STATEMENT AT BAR THAT THE ASSESSEES WANTS TO UTI LIZE THE DIRECT 4 ITA NOS. 3240 /CHNY/2016 & 14 ORS. TAXES VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME 2020 TO SETTLE PEN DING DISPUTE RELATING TO DIRECT TAXES AND IN THIS REGARD SOME OF ASSESSEES HAVE FILED FORM NO 1 AND 2 AND AWAITING FORM NO. 3 FROM THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY. IN SOME CASES THE ASSESSEES HAVE RECEI VED FORM NO. 3 FROM THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY AND IN SOME CASES TH E ASSESSEE HAVE FILED LETTER AND EXPRESSED THEIR WILLINGNESS T O FILE FORM NO. 1 AND 2 BEFORE THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY. 4. THE BENCH HAS CONSIDERED RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BO TH SIDES AND AFTER HEARING BOTH PARTIES WE FOUND THAT THE GOV ERNMENT OF INDIA HAS ANNOUNCED IN THE BUDGET 2020 A DIRECT TAXES VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME 2020 TO SETTLE PENDING DISPUTE RELATING TO DIRECT TAXES AT VARIOUS APPELLATE FORUMS INCLUDI NG THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY TRIBUNAL HIGH COURT AND SU PREME COURT. IN THIS REGARD THE SCHEME HAS BEEN NOTIFIED ON 17 TH MARCH 2020 AND BECAME DIRECT TAXES VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT 2020. A S PER THE SAID SCHEME ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED TO SETTLE DIRECT TAX DISPUTE IN A MANNER AND PROCEDURE PRESCRIBED THEREIN BY FILING N ECESSARY DECLARATION AND UNDERTAKING. THE SCHEME HAS ALSO SP ECIFIED THE AMOUNT OF TAXES INTEREST AND PENALTY IF ANY PAYA BLE UNDER THE ACT. IF AN ASSESSEE FILED A DECLARATION AND PAY SPECI FIED TAXES AS PER 5 ITA NOS. 3240 /CHNY/2016 & 14 ORS. THE SCHEME AND WITHDRAW THE APPEAL PENDING BEFOR E THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY SHALL PASS AN ORDER IN FORM 5 CONFIRMING PAYMENT MADE UNDER THE SCHEME AND GRA NT IMMUNITY FROM PENALTY AND PROSECUTION. 5. IN THESE PRESENT APPEALS SOME ASSESSEES HAVE F ILED DECLARATION IN FORM NO.1 ALONG WITH UNDERTAKING WAI VING RIGHTS FOR ANY REMEDY IN FORM NO. 2 TO THE DESIGNATED AUTHORIT Y AND HAS ALSO RECEIVED FORM 3. IN SOME CASES FORM NO 1 AND 2 H AS BEEN FILED AND AWAITING FORM NO. 3 FROM THE DESIGNATED AUTHORI TY AND IN SOME CASES THE ASSESSEES HAVE EXPRESSED THEIR WILLINGN ESS TO FILE FORM NO. 1 AND 2 AND SETTLE THEIR DISPUTE UNDER THE SCHE ME. THEREFORE ONCE THE ASSESSEES INTEND TO FILE A DECLARATION IN FORM NO.1 ALONG WITH UNDERTAKING AND EXPRESSED THEIR WILLINGNESS TO SETTLE PENDING DISPUTES REGARDING DIRECT TAXES THEN THERE IS NO P OINT IN KEEPING APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEES. WE FURTHER NOTED THAT RECENTLY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF MADRAS HAS C ONSIDERED AN IDENTICAL APPLICATION FILED BY AN ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF M/S. NANNUSAMY MOHAN (HUF) VS. ACIT IN T.C.A NO.372 OF 2 020 FOR AVAILING THE BENEFIT OF VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME 2020 WHERE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER 6 ITA NOS. 3240 /CHNY/2016 & 14 ORS. AS WITHDRAWN BUT ALLOWED LIBERTY TO THE ASSESSEE TO RESTORE THE APPEAL IN THE EVENT THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY FOR ANY REASON REJECT APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE ACT. THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE HONBL E HIGH COURT OF MADRAS VIDE ORDER DATED 16.10.2020 ARE EXTRACTED AS UNDER:- 2. WE HAVE HEARD MR.M.P.SENTHIL KUMAR LEARNED C OUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE APPELLANT/ASSESSEE AND MR.T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR LEARNED SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL AND MS. K.G.USHA RANI LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT/REVENUE. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT / ASSESSEE ON INSTRUCTIONS SUBMITTED THAT THE APPELLANT / ASSESS EE INTENDS TO AVAIL THE BENEFIT OF VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME ( VVS SCHEME' FOR BREVITY) AND IN THIS REGARD THE ASSESSEE IS TA KING STEPS TO FILE THE APPLICATION / DECLARATION IN FORM NO. 1. 4. IT MAY NOT BE NECESSARY FOR THIS COURT TO DECIDE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW FRAMED FOR CONSIDERATI ON ON ACCOUNT OF CERTAIN SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENTS. THE GOV ERNMENT OF INDIA ENACTED THE DIRECT TAX VIVAD SE VISHWAS AC T 2020 (ACT 3 OF 2020) TO PROVIDE FOR RESOLUTION OF DISPUTED TA X AND FOR MATTERS CONNECTED THEREWITH OR INCIDENTAL THERETO. THE ACT OF THE PARLIAMENT RECEIVED THE ASSENT OF THE PRESIDENT ON 17TH MARCH 2020 AND PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF INDIA ON 17TH MARCH 2020. 5. IN TERMS OF THE SAID ACT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GIVEN AN OPTION TO PUT AN END TO THE TAX DISPUTES WHICH MAY BE PENDING AT DIFFERENT LEVELS EITHER BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY OR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL OR BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OR BEF ORE THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA. UNDER SECTION 2(J) 'DISPUTED TAX' HAS BEEN DEFINED. IN TERMS OF SECTION 3 WHERE A DECLARANT MEANS A PERSON WHO FILES A DECLARATION UNDER SECTI ON 4 ON OR BEFORE THE LAST DATE FILES A DECLARATION TO THE DES IGNATED AUTHORITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 4 IN R ESPECT OF TAX ARREARS THEN NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED I N THE INCOME TAX ACT OR ANY OTHER LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORC E THE AMOUNT PAYABLE BY THE DECLARANT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN TER MS OF SECTION 3(A-C) THEREUNDER. 7 ITA NOS. 3240 /CHNY/2016 & 14 ORS. 6. THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 3 STATES THAT IN C ASE WHERE AN APPEAL OR WRIT PETITION OR SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION I S FILED BY THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITY ON ANY ISSUE BEFORE THE APPELL ATE FORUM THE AMOUNT PAYABLE SHALL BE ONE-HALF OF THE AMOUNT IN THE TABLE STIPULATED IN SECTION 3 CALCULATED ON SUCH ISSUE I N SUCH A MANNER AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED. THE SECOND PROVISO DEA LS WITH THE CASES WHERE THE MATTER IS BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) OR BEFORE THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL. THE THIRD PROV ISO DEALS WITH CASES WHERE THE ISSUE IS PENDING BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. THE FILING OF THE DECLARATION IS AS PER SECTION 4 OF THE ACT AND THE PARTICULARS TO BE FURNISHED AR E ALSO MENTIONED IN THE SUB SECTIONS OF SECTION 4. SECTION 5 OF THE ACT DEALS WITH THE TIME AND MANNER OF THE PAYMENT AND S ECTION 6 DEALS WITH IMMUNITY FROM INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS IN RESPECT OF OFFENCE AND IMPOSITION OF PENALTY IN CERTAIN CASES. SECTION 9 OF THE ACT DEALS WITH CASES WHERE THE ACT 3 OF 2020 W ILL NOT BE APPLICABLE. 7. AS OBSERVED THE ASSESSEE IS GIVEN LIBERTY TO RE STORE THIS APPEAL IN THE EVENT THE ULTIMATE DECISION TO BE TAK EN ON THE DECLARATION TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTI ON 4 OF THE SAID ACT IS NOT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. IF SUCH A PRAYER IS MADE THE REGISTRY SHALL ENTERTAIN THE PRAYER WITHO UT INSISTING UPON ANY APPLICATION TO BE FILED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN RESTORATION OF THE APPEAL AND ON SUCH REQUEST MA DE BY THE ASSESSEE BY FILING A MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FOR RES TORATION THE REGISTRY SHALL PLACE SUCH PETITION BEFORE THE DIVIS ION BENCH FOR ORDERS. 8. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE WE DIRECT THE APPE LLANT / ASSESSEE TO FILE THE FORM NO.1 ON OR BEFORE 20.11.2020 AND T HE COMPETENT AUTHORITY SHALL PROCESS THE APPLICATION / DECLARATI ON IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS AS EXPEDIT IOUSLY AS POSSIBLE PREFERABLY WITHIN A PERIOD OF SIX (6) WEEK S FROM THE DATE ON WHICH THE DECLARATION IS FILED IN THE PROPER FOR M. 6. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DECISION OF THE HONBL E HIGH COURT OF MADRAS AND BY TAKING NOTE OF THE FACT THAT SOME ASSESSEES HAVE ALREADY FILED DECLARATION IN FORM NO.1 ALONG WITH FORM NO.2 TO THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY AND RECEIVED FORM 3 AND SOM E ASSESSEES 8 ITA NOS. 3240 /CHNY/2016 & 14 ORS. HAD ALREADY FILED FORM NO. 1 & 2 AND AWAITING FORM NO. 3 FROM THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY AND ALSO THE FACT THAT REMAINI NG ASSESSEES ARE WILLING TO FILE FORM NO. 1 AND 2 WITHIN THE DUE DAT E PRESCRIBED FOR THIS PURPOSE WE DISMISS THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSES SEES AS WITHDRAWN. HOWEVER A LIBERTY IS GIVEN TO THE ASSES SEES TO RESTORE THE APPEALS IN THE EVENT OF THE DESIGNATED AUTH ORITY FOR ANY REASON REJECT THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE SAID ACT. 7. IN THE RESULT ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEES ARE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST MARCH 2021 SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . ) ( V.DURGA RAO ) ( G.MANJUNATHA ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI /DATED 1 ST MARCH 2021 DS ! $! /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. % () /CIT(A) 4. % /CIT 5. ! + /DR 6. . /GF .