Harshita Chhawchharia v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kolkata-18 & Ors

ORDER SHEET WPO 1917 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTACONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTIONORIGINAL SIDE HARSHITA CHHAWCHHARIA Vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOLKATA-18 & ORS. BEFORE:The Hon’ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDINDate : 7[th] April, 2022(Via Video Conference) Mr. Sanjay Bhowmick,Mr. Indranil Banerjee, Mr. Pranav Sharma, Advs.…for the petitionerMr. Tilok Mitra, Adv.…for the respondents The Court: In this matter, petitioner has challenged the impugnedorder of rejection of petitioner’s application dated 20[th] January, 2022under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Act, 2020, relating toassessment year 2009-10. On perusal of the same, I find that the viewtaken for rejecting the petitioner’s aforesaid application that thepending appeal in question before this Court could not be deemed tobe pending on 31[st] January, 2020, is contrary to law laid down by theHon’ble Telangana High Court in the case of Boddu Ramesh vs.Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad reported in (2021) 128 taxmann.com 13 (Telangana), the decision of the Hon’ble GujaratHigh Court in the case of Maheshbhai Shantilal Patel vs. PrincipalCommissioner of Income Tax, Central, Ahmedabad reported in (2021)131 taxmann.com 1 (Gujarat) and unreported decision of the Hon’bleRajasthan High Court dated 17[th] February, 2022 in D.B. Civil WritPetition NO. 4178 of 2021 (Rakesh Garg vs. Principal Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Ajmer) and order of this Court dated 4[th] October, 2021 inWPA 12534 of 2021 (M/s. Ankur Vintrade Pvt. Ltd. vs. Chairman,Central Board of Direct Taxes & Ors.). It may be recorded that the sole ground contained in theimpugned rejection order is that the criteria of pendency of appeal atthe time of filing the application under the said Scheme was notpending and not on any other ground which according to me is notsustainable in view of the decisions of the aforesaid High Courts andof this Court in view of the fact that when this Court has admitted theappeal of the petitioner by order dated 21[st] January, 2021 bycondoning the delay in filing the appeal in question in exercise ofdiscretion of this Court it should be construed that there was no delayin preferring the appeal within time and fulfilling of criteria ofpendency of appeal at the time of making application under the saidScheme has been fulfilled in this case. Accordingly, this writ petition being WPO 1917 of 2022 isdisposed of by setting aside the impugned order dated 20[th] January,2022 as appears at page 148 of the writ petition by directing the respondent concerned to accept the declaration of the petitioner underthe aforesaid scheme subject to fulfilment of any other formalitiesunder the law. With these observations and directions, this writ petition standsdisposed of. (MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J.) TR/