Whether section 3 of prohibition of Benami property transaction act,1988 is prospective or retrospective?

1.In case of appeal pending before ITAT whether in declaration form 1 part B “Details of order by which tax arrears determined” – in column 3 & 4 of this point whether the details is to be filed for order passed by AO U/s 143(3) or 250(Appeal effect) or appeal order passed by CIT(A).

2. In case of appeal filed before ITAT no ack.or reference no. is given, the Registrar simply returns one copy of covering letter of documents filed with form 36 by putting the seal/signature and date, so how the colomn of reference no. ack. no. is to be filled in column 7 of this part.

Addition u/s 14A was made in Original Assessment Order us 143(3) say for Rs. 50 Lakhs.

Subsequently same addition of Rs. 50.00 Lakhs was repeated in Assessment Order u/s 143(3) r.w. 153(3).

As per the present scheme addition for multiple orders for the same assessment year can be offered under the Scheme.

As per Q 19 of Clarification dated 22.04.2020 if multiple orders are being settled disputed tax will aggregate amount of tax in both the appeals i.e Rs. 1.00 Crores instead of addition of Rs. 50.00 Lakhs in both the order for same ground.

This will lead to double taxation of same addition for the same ground for the same assessment year.

Addition on certain ground u/s 14A was made in Original Assessment Order us 143(3) say for Rs. 50 Lakhs.

Subsequently addition of Rs. 50.00 Lakhs was again made on the same ground in Assessment Order u/s 143(3) r.w. 153(3).

As per the present scheme addition for multiple orders for the same assessment year can be offered under the Scheme.

As per Q 19 of Clarification dated 22.04.2020 if multiple orders are being settled disputed tax will aggregate amount of tax in both the appeals i.e Rs. 1.00 Crores instead of addition of Rs. 50.00 Lakhs in both the order for same ground.

This will lead to double taxation of same addition for the same ground for the same assessment year.

In my client case for A.Y. 2014-15, ITAT has granted relief against the addition made by A.O. on account of exemtion from Capital Gain claimed earned on Penny Stock.
Thereafter, I.Tax deaprtment filed MA against the decision of ITAT. The same is pending till date.

In the next A.Y. 2015-16, the identical exemption on Capital Gain claimed by assess was disallowed by A.O. and confirmrd by CIT(A).

The assessee has opted payment of tax for A.Y. 2015-16 under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

He is interested to pay tax under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme on A.Y. 2014-15 to avoid any disallownce by ITAT later on by restoring the appeal of A.Y. 2014-15,and reversing the decision, though its chances are very remote.

Kindly give your considered view, who the interest of assessee can be protected in the worst scenario.
Ca P K gupta

Whether by virtue of provisions of clause 5(3) of the VSV Bill, once application made is accepted and taxes paid thereon, whether the Assessee would be eligible for immunity from other laws (Benami, etc.)

Order of ITAT passed on dated 30.10.2019. Assessee did not file writ to High Court. Time Limit expired on 04.04.2020 (i.e. after 31.01.2020). Now after entering this information in PART-B, Schedule No. VI of SCHEDULE-A is not being enabled for editing. Therefore Net amount payable by appellant cannot be calculated in PART- C,D,E & F. How to resolve the issue?

CIT(A) refused to condone delay in filing of appeal against penalty order. Assesse filed appeal against the CIT(A) order wit the ITAT.

In the mean time can assessee take the benefit of the scheme.

Please clarify that reply to question no. 22 in last line it has been clarified that “assessee covered under prosecution is not eligible to file unless prosecution is compounded before filing the declaration.” For compounding assessee has to pay Tax, Interest, penalty relating to offence, further undertakes to pay compounding charges, withdraw the appeals . Is it mean that the assessee had first to pay compounding fee equal to 125/150 percent of tax sought to be evaded, compounding charges then only he can go for VSV. Then what benefit such assessee gets from this scheme.
Further what will be the effect on right of compounding in future as compounding is one time feature.

Penalties have been levied on my client u/s 271A for not maintaining books of accounts u/s 44AA & also u/s 271B for not getting the said books of accounts audited u/s 44AB for the same assessment year. These proceedings have been initiated under separate notices issued under separate sections and as such are two different penalty proceedings. I wish to settle Penalty u/s 271A but continue to contest penalty u/s 271B. Is it possible to do so without impacting or influencing the outcome of the future proceedings u/s 271B due to acceptance and settlement of penalty u/s 271A.