Itta/27/2022 Of The Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Sri Sarnala Sayababu

APHC010485412022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3516] TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHANTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAYINCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 27/2022 Between: The Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax ...APPELLANT AND Sri Sarnala Sayababu ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: 1.Y N VIVEKANANDA Counsel for the Respondent: 1.A V A SIVA KARTIKEYA The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B. Krishna Mohan) Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This appeal arises against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam in I.T.A.No.98/Viz./2021 dated 11.05.2022 for the assessment year 2016-17. 3. The respondent-Assessee filed returns on 15.10.2016, thereafter, an assessment order was passed under Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 21.12.2018 and aggrieved by the same, the respondent/assessee preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority dated 23.01.2019. Pending the appeal, he filed an application under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme on 21.03.2020. Consequently, the appeal was closed on 19.01.2021. But the appellant invoked the provisions of Section 263 of the Income Tax Act and issued show cause notice dated 03.02.2021, for which, the respondent/assessee submitted reply for the same. Then the order was passed by the Revisional Authority on 24.03.2021 observing that this revisional authority still can go into the issue of whether the asset is a short term capital asset or long term capital asset. The appellant invoked the revisional authority under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, aggrieved by the same, the respondent/assessee filed the above said Income Tax appeal before the learned Tribunal in I.T.A.No.98 of 2021 and after going into the merits of the case, the Tribunal held that, once the matter under VSV Scheme has reached finality, the same cannot be invoked under any other proceedings under the Income Tax Act or under any law for the time being in force by relying upon the Section 5 (3) of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and as such, it found fault with the issuance of Form-5 by the revisional authority under Section 263 of the Act. 4. Accordingly, the assesse’s appeal was allowed, against which, the appellant preferred this appeal on the following substantial question of law said to have been arisen: “1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Tribunal but perverse”. 2) Whether, on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in quashing the order passed u/s. 263 of the Act without considering that the issue settled in VSV is different from the issue taken up in the order for revision u/s.263?.” 5. On perusal and upon hearing the submissions of both the counsels, we do not find any substantial question of law in this appeal as the observation of the Tribunal is reasonable, justified and in accordance with law. 6. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. HBKM,J & HVN,J I.T.T.A.No.27 of 2022 As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN ________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY 11.02.2025 PGT