Sundararajan Raghunathan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Vivad-Se-Vishwas Didn’t Mature — Appeal Can’t Die by Assumption
The ITAT Chennai condoned a 168-day delay and set aside the CIT(A)’s order which had dismissed the appeal as “withdrawn” merely because the assessee had opted for Vivad-Se-Vishwas, 2020.
The assessee had filed Form-3 under the Scheme, which the CIT(A) himself acknowledged, but the assessee could not make payment by 31.03.2021 due to financial distress. Consequently, the dispute was never settled under the Scheme. Despite this, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adjudicating the merits, treating it as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that mere opting for VSV does not extinguish the statutory appeal unless the scheme actually culminates in settlement. Where the declaration fails or is not carried through, the original appeal revives automatically and must be decided on merits u/s 250(6).
In the interest of justice and fair play, the ITAT restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) with a clear direction to adjudicate the grounds on merits after granting opportunity. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A), (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.CIT(A)”), Kochi, dated 14.02.2025 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as “AY”) 2017-18.
