Re: Whether pendency of revision petition u/s 264 is eligible to file declaration under VSV Scheme
My revision petition u/s 264 is pending as on 31.1.2020 against the assessment order passed by the assessing officer u/s 147/143(3). Though returned income has been accepted by the assessing officer and while framing assessment yet revision petition has been filed against wrong declaration of long term capital gain in the return due to the mistake of tax professional as the asset sold was not capital asset and even 50% of the total sale consideration belong to assessee. After framing assessment penalties u/s 271(1)(c) and 140A(3) (for not payment of self assessment tax) have also been imposed by the A.O. Separate appeals are pending against penalty orders. My revision petition is still pending. Kindly guide whether my case is eligible for declaration under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Please also guide any other remedy. Since VSV scheme is closing on 28.2.21, an urgent reply is requested please.
Please refer Circular No. 9 dt . 22 -4 .2020 , Q. No. 1 and Answer given by CBDT , clarified that cases where revision application under section 264 of the Act is pending before the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner are also covered .
Thanks for answer given by your goodself to my query regarding applicability of this scheme where petition u/s 264 has been filed. I understand that the case is covered for filing declaration under the scheme. But the Designated Authority has rejected my declaration with the following reasons:
“The assessee has filed declaration on disputed tax determined u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 wherein only Rs.515/- was added to the returned income, the assessee is in revision u/s 264 and has disputed the entire income assessed u/s 143(3) which included included returned income of Rs.687490/-. Since the declaration is factually incorrect, the same is being rejected.”
As already brought to you in my query, I have filed revision petition on the issue of income wrongly declared in the ITR on account of long term capital gain as the land sold was not a capital asset and only 50% share of sale consideration belong to assessee. The returned income was declared wrongly by the tax professional. In view of these facts, pl. guide whether the decision of the designated authority is as per Law. If not which remedy should be taken to avail the benefit of this scheme. THANKS FOR HOPING FOR EARLY REPLY.