| Query | In my case after issue of Form 3 on 14/12/20 a communication has been received giving a revised Form 3 increasing the Tax payable quoting a Circular by CDBT dated 4/12/20. My case while it was of Assesment under Sec 143 as also informed in Form 1 submitted by me is now being treated as a Search case due to some guidelines in the captioned circular. Sec 5(3) of the VsV scheme clearly stipulates the the Form e once issued is conclusive and can not be reopened in any subsequent proceeding under the OT Act. |
| Answer | On the facts it seems that the assessee has not paid the tax as demanded by the Designated Authority, and before the payment of the tax in dispute revised intimation is sent by the Designated Authority based on the interpretation of given by the CBDT Circular No 21 dt 4 -12- 2020 question No .70 and answer given by the CBDT . The only alternative with the assesseee is file Writ before the High Court , challenging the interpretation given by the High Court . Section 5 (3) will be applicable only after the payment of the disputed tax and issue of certificate by the Designated Authority .
|
| Query | Assessment order u/s 147 read with sec. 144 passed and later on Ex-parte order u/s 271(1)(C) also passed by the same AO in the same case. The appeals against both the orders are pending with CIT (A). What will be the liability under VSVS? only Tax amount or Tax + 25% of penalty..? |
| Answer | Only on tax in dispute . One the quantum appeal will be settled , the interest and penalty will be waived . Please refer Circular No. 9 dt 22-4 -2020 , Q. No 34 and Ans , once the quantum appeal is settled the penalty is automatically covered , the assesssee is required to indicate both appeals in declaration form ( Form No 1 ) for that year
|
| Query | The assessment is done u/s 143(3) and addition is made for LTCG for penny stock case. No search / search assessment was done on the assessee. We have filed for VSV. The AO is planning to amend calculations of Tax considering this as a search case based on Q no. 70 in FAQs. He is of the view that search was done on a kolkata based entity and from that the informations has been passed by the investigation wing. Hence according to him the Reply to the FAQ applies in our case. Kindly guide. |
| Answer | The assessee is right similar view is advanced by the Officers across the Country , it seems the representation is made by the Tax Prctioners . If the Board is not accepting the representation the aggrieved assessee may have to file Writ before High Court .
|
| Query | Sir, |
| Answer | There could be some delay in forwarding the intimation , that will not invalidate the form submitted by the assessee. The Assessee can make the payment on or before March , 2021 , without payment of additional amount . Refer Circular No 18/2020 dt 28 -10 2020
|
| Query | A CASE OF 194-I RELATING TO DEDUCTION OF TDS FOR AY-2010-11. THEN HOW ASSESSEE CAN OPT FOR SUCH SCHEME. |
| Answer | The assessee can avail the benefit of the scheme . Rules or forms cannot go beyond the the provisions of the Act. As per S. 2(1) (a) defines the appellant , as per the definition the assessee is eligible . Section 2 (n) defines the specified date i.e. means the January , 2020. Also refer Circular No 9 /2020 dt 22-4 -2020 , Q No 1 and Answer. The assessee can state in the form assessment year prior to 2013 -14. If the form is not accepted the assessee can approach the Designated Authority. In case no response id received, the assessee may have to approach High Court by way of Writ. |
| Query | Hello Sir Assessee’s appeal for AY 2009-2010 in ITAT was partly allowed, bogus purchase addition is reduce from 12.5% to 5% |
| Answer | Please refer Section 3 proviso and Circular No dt Q. No 39 . Ans : In this case on the issue where the taxpayer has got the relief from ITAT in an earlier year ( not reversed by HC or SC ) the disputed tax shall be computed at half of normal rate of 100% , …… , as the case may be . If the assessee desires to settle the issue in respect of department appeal pending before High Court , the assessee is liable to pay only 50% of tax in dispute , as regards the appeal pending before the CIT (A) , the assessee is not eligible to get the concessional rate of 50 % of tax in dispute .
|
| Query | Honorable ITAT has disposed Appeals for AYs 2008-09 and 2012-13 filed Regards |
| Answer | As per the clarification given by the CBDT ,the MA can be settled under the Scheme only if the same is dismissed in limine i.e. at the beginning of the proceedings. This has been clarified at FAQ No. 61 of CBDT Circular No. 21 of 2020 dated December 4, 2020. However we are of the considered opinion that , rectification u/s 254 (2) is continuation of appeal proceedings before the ITAT, hence one may take the view that even when rectification application is pending it can be construed as pending. let us take an example if rectification is allowed the appeal is restored , it relate back the date of filing of an appeal. Hence the assessee can opt for the scheme when the miscellaneous application is pending for final disposal. One may have to consider in following cases the Courts have held that order rejecting the application made u/s. 254(2) of the Act is not maintainable. Chem Amit v. ACIT (2005) 272 ITR 397 (Bom.)(HC) , Safari Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. v. ITAT (2016) 386 ITR 4 (Bom.) (HC), CIT v. Singhal Industries (2017) 395 ITR 264 (Raj) (HC), Madhav Marbles & Granites v. ITAT (2012) 65 DTR 217 / 246 CTR 243 / 2012 Tax LR 465 (Raj.)(HC) On the facts as the application is rejected the assesee may have to file writ before the High Court.
|