The facts of the case are as under:
Sr No Particulars Amount in
Lacs
1. Returned loss 500
2. Addition made by the AO
600
3. Assessed Income 100

Case -1
As in the above case, returned loss has been converted into income, meaning thereby, returned loss of Rs 500 lacs has been fully reduced to nil and converted into income of Rs 100 lacs after assessment.
The assessee wants to exercise the second option as given in Rule 9(1)(ii), i.e to carry forward the reduced loss of Rs 500 lacs to nil and wants to pay the tax on balance amount of addition of Rs. 100 lacs (Rs. 600 lacs-Rs 500 lacs ).

Query 1 :
For the above situation, no schedule is available in Form no 1, then how the assessee can file form no 1, please clarify.

Case -2
In the aforesaid example, if the assessee is having a decision of higher court in his favour on the addition made by the AO which has also not been reversed so far, then as per second provisio to rule 9(2), one-half of the amount by which loss is reduced shall be considered for reduction.

Consequently, in the above example, 50% of addition works out to Rs 300 lacs and as such the assessee can carry forward the reduced loss of Rs. 200 lacs (Rs 500 lacs minus Rs 300 lacs) as per the aforesaid second provisio to Rule 9(2).

Query 2 :
Again for such a situation, no schedule is available in Form no 1, then how the assessee can file form no 1, please clarify.

Case -3
In the aforesaid example, if the assessee has got full relief form CIT (A)/ITAT/High Court on the addition of Rs 600 lacs made by the AO and IT Department has further filed appeal before ITAT/High Court/Supreme Court as the case may be which is pending as on 31.01.2020.

In the above case, the assessee is liable to pay 50% of disputed tax or carry forward the reduced loss by 50% as per section 3 read with section 1(j) of Act and also read with Rule 9 above.

Consequently, in the above example, 50% of addition works out to Rs 300 lacs and as such the assessee can carry forward the reduced loss of Rs. 200 lacs (Rs 500 lacs minus Rs 300 lacs) as per as per section 3 read with section 1(j) of Act and also read with Rule 9 above.

Query 3 :
Again for such a situation, no schedule is available in Form no 1, then how the assessee can file form no 1, please clarify.

Case-4

In the aforesaid example it is assumed that the assessee has to carry forward reduced loss in a particular assessment year under the scheme. Under such situation, benefit of such reduced carry forward loss of such assessment year is to be allowed in other assessment years where assessee is also going under this scheme for other subsequent years as well.

Query 4:

How the reduced loss carried forward in one particular assessment year under the aforesaid scheme is to be shown as Brought forward reduced loss in next assessment year and so on in form no 1 so as to set off the same in subsequent assessment year or years to work out disputed tax, if any, under the said scheme, please clarify.

As per the proviso to Rule 9(2), if the declarant opts not to pay tax and carry forward the reduced losses, then in subsequent years the assessee shall be liable to pay interest.

Suppose there are two pending appeals of A Ltd and for Year 1 the returned loss was Rs 15 lakhs and the addition made by the AO was of Rs 15 lakhs.

For year 2, the returned income was 5 lakhs after set off of loss of year 1. In this, the addition made is of Rs 10 lakhs and also denied the loss i.e, assessed income became 30 Lakhs.

Here, the assessee wishes to opt for VsV scheme for both the years and exercise the option of carry forward the reduced loss.

Whether Interest u/s 234B, 220 is leviable in year 2 ?

There are many missing sections while Filling Form 1, Part B, Coloumn 4 – Section under which order is passed…
Some of the sections are 143(1), 220(2), 206C(6A), 206C(7), 200A, 234E, 234F, etc and many more. How can Form 1 be filed in the cases where order under this section is passed.

Moreover how can The TAN of the Assessee be entered in this Form 1, Part A – 1st Row PAN/TAN.

These are autopopulated columns.
Thanks in advance

In a case where prosecution proceedings under any of the provisions of the Income Tax Act has been instituted against the assessee immediately after framing of assessment against him by filing a complaint in the Competent Court though against the Spirit of Circular No.24/2019 Dtd. 09.09.2019 issued by CBDT since the penalty has not been confirmed by the ITAT and simultaneously, the Department withdraws the Complaint filed before the Competent Court, Whether such withdrawal from the Court would tantamount to Non-institution of Prosecution Proceedings and the Benefit of the DTVsV could be availed by the assessee??

In a case where an assessee opts for the DTVsV and a Final Certificate is issued by the DA in terms of the said Act, whether the Department would be debarred from reopening the assessment case u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act for the particular assessment year as per the provisions of section 5 of the DTVsV, even on the basis of any Audit Objections, fresh tangible material post assessment etc.??

In a case where the proceedings under section 179 of the Income Tax Act have been instituted against the Directors in respect of tax liability of the Private Limited Company and the Company opts for the DTVsV Scheme, whether the immunity extended by the provisions of Section 6 of DTVsV apply to the parallel proceedings undertaken u/s.179??

We have won the search case u/s 132 at ITAT forum,now IT deptt preferred appeal in Delhi High court
In above matter Addition made on Substantive basis in Company A disputed tax demand exceeding 5 crore say 7 crore ,hence not eligible for Scheme

Whereas in above AO made addition in B & C each 3.5 crore on Protective basis

Can we go in scheme on protective basis ,ignoring the substantive basis ?

Appeal before CIT(Appeals) is pending regarding deduction under section 54F as on 31-01-2020 . Even though one hearing took place before 31-01-2020, neither order nor enhancement notice was issued. In the meanwhile notice under section 263 was issued on the ground that the assessing officer failed to apply section 50C in the month of August 2019. The assessee replied that as per the decision of the jurisdictional high court decision in the case of Renuka Phillip, section 263 cannot be invoked during the pendency of Appeal and the assessee is willing to avail the VVS scheme if the proceedings under section 263 are dropped. However order has been passed under section 263 setting aside the assessment with a direction to the assessing officer to apply section 50C on 21-03-2020 in spite of the willingness of the assessee to avail VVS. Now that the assessment is set aside, whether the appeal would become infructuous and the assessee will not be able to avail VVS. Can he avail VVS in respect of the dispute with reference to section 54F only and dispute the application of section 50C by requiring the assessing officer to make a reference to valuation officer. Or can he file appeal to the Honourable Chennai ITAT against 263 order. Is the PCIT correct in setting aside the assessment when appeal is pending before CIT(Appeals) and it is possible that that the assessment order may be annulled for technical reasons like non issue of notice under section 143(2) and enhancement notice was not issued before 31-01-2020 even though the case was already heard by the CIT(Appeals ) in February 2019 itself.

The addition was made u/s.68 in the case of a Company. The assessee-company has b/f. MAT Credit of which part adjustment is made during the subject year in the Return filed and balance c/f. to subsequent year. Post addition u/s.68 made by AO, the Company is entitled to MAT Credit based on assessed tax under normal rate of tax being higher than as per ROI when Book Profit u/s.115JB remained the same. While raising demand, credit for MAT was given as claimed in ROI. The assessee-company filed appeal before 31-1-2020 which is pending on that day disputing addition u/s.68. MAT credit not allowed properly is not disputed in GOA but rectification application application is filed u/s. 154.
Whether excess MAT credit that should have been granted be considered while arriving at disputed tax liability under VSV Scheme Act?

Sir, although my query is not related to VSVS, but i take this opportunity to raise a very relevant question to the expert panel. Sir my question is under section 11 of IT Act. Wheher time for making investment of accumulated income (which has expired on 31.03.2020) is also entended to 30.06.2020. Investment could not be made disto Karoon lock down.
Thanx and regards.
Suneel Trivedi