Commissioner Of Income Tax - 1 v. Chemspec Chemicals P. Ltd

S.S.Kilaje IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1544 OF 2012 Commissioner of Income Tax - 1..Appellant Versus Chemspec Chemicals P. Ltd. ..Respondent ................... Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Appellant. Mr. Atul K. Jasani for the Respondent. ................... CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 03, 2021. P.C.: Heard Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned standing counsel, Revenue forthe appellant and Mr. Atul Jasani, learned counsel for therespondent / assessee. 2. This appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been preferred by the revenue as the appellant against the order dated29.03.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "C" Bench,Mumbai in IT(SS)A Nos. 503/Mum/2004 and 476/Mum/2004 for theblock period 01.04.1990 to 22.01.2001. 3. The appeal was admitted by this Court on 12.12.2014 on thesubstantial questions of law framed in the said order. 4. It is stated that during the pendency of the appeal Parliamenthas enacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 providing for ascheme for resolution of tax disputes. In terms of the scheme,respondent/assessee has made a declaration under section 3 thereofbefore the designated authority on 03.11.2020 for four assessmentyears i.e. 1988-89, 1999-00, 2000-01 and 2001-02 covered in theblock period under consideration. Designated authority has issuedcertificates under section 5(1) on 23.12.2020 determining amountspayable by the appellant for the four assessment years atRs.11,87,752.00 : Rs.54,494.00 : Rs.54,494.00 : and Rs.71,04,153.00respectively with instructions to pay the said amount by 31.03.2021. 5.Respondent/assessee has stated that the amounts determined bythe designated authority as above have been paid on 23.12.2020.However, for passing of final order under section 5(2), appeal isrequired to be withdrawn. Hence, the prayer for withdrawal of theappeal. 6. When the case was heard on 19.01.2021, we had passed adetailed order in the following terms :- "11. Though the Act is silent regarding withdrawal ofappeal by the income tax department when the assessee asthe declarant has filed declaration before the designatedauthority and pays the tax amount determined by thedesignated authority, from the answers given to questionNos.21 and 48 we find that even when the income taxdepartment is in appeal before the High Court the assesseecan ask for settlement under the Act and if he pays theappeal by the income tax department when the assessee asthe declarant has filed declaration before the designatedauthority and pays the tax amount determined by thedesignated authority, from the answers given to questionNos.21 and 48 we find that even when the income taxdepartment is in appeal before the High Court the assesseecan ask for settlement under the Act and if he pays the determined tax amount, the income tax department wouldbe under an obligation to withdraw the appeal. There isgood reason for taking such a view because having allowedan assessee to opt for settlement under the Act and havingdetermined the tax amount required to be paid by theassessee under the Act and having accepted the paymentmade by the assessee, it would be wholly unjust and unfairto allow the income tax department to continue proceedingwith the appeal pending in the High Court notwithstandingsettlement of dues of the assessee under the scheme. 12. Reverting back to the facts of the present case, we findthat income tax department has acknowledged receipt ofthe determined amounts paid by the appellant. If that be so,we do not find any good reason for the revenue to continuewith the appeal, particularly in the light of section 5(3)which clarifies that upon passing of order under sub-section(1) of section 5, determining the amount payable under theAct, it shall be conclusive as to the matters stated thereinand no matters covered by such order shall be reopened inany other proceeding under the Income Tax Act, 1961 orunder any other law for the time in force." 12. Reverting back to the facts of the present case, we findthat income tax department has acknowledged receipt ofthe determined amounts paid by the appellant. If that be so,we do not find any good reason for the revenue to continuewith the appeal, particularly in the light of section 5(3)which clarifies that upon passing of order under sub-section(1) of section 5, determining the amount payable under theAct, it shall be conclusive as to the matters stated thereinand no matters covered by such order shall be reopened inany other proceeding under the Income Tax Act, 1961 orunder any other law for the time in force." 7. Today when the matter is called upon, Mr. Suresh Kumarsubmits on instruction that he would like to withdraw the appeal. 8. Accordingly the appeal is disposed of as withdrawn. 9. Refund as per Rules. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] [ UJJAL BHUYAN, J. ] Digitally signedRavindraby Ravindra M.AmberkarM.Date:Amberkar2021.02.0418:12:23+0530