Facts of the Case
The petitioner, NRA Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd., challenged the
order dated 28.01.2021 whereby its revised declaration filed under the Direct
Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 for Assessment Year 2009–10 was rejected. The
petitioner had succeeded before the CIT(A), ITAT, and the Delhi High Court.
However, the Revenue succeeded before the Supreme Court by order dated
05.03.2019. The petitioner’s application for recall was rejected on 25.10.2019,
and thereafter a review petition was filed on 18.11.2019, which was dismissed
on 04.02.2020.
The DTVSV Act was notified on 18.03.2020. The petitioner filed
a declaration on 26.12.2020 and a revised declaration on 28.01.2021 seeking
benefit of the scheme, contending that the review petition was pending as on
the specified date i.e., 31.01.2020. The declaration was rejected on the ground
that no appeal was pending and that a review petition could not be treated as
an appeal under the Act.
Issues Involved
Whether a review petition pending as on the specified date
qualifies as “pending proceedings” under Section 2(1)(j) of the DTVSV Act,
2020, and whether rejection of the declaration on a narrow and literal
interpretation was legally sustainable.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The petitioner contended that a review petition is an
extension of appellate proceedings and an order does not attain finality so
long as a review is pending. It was argued that the object of the DTVSV Act is
to reduce litigation and that a purposive interpretation must be adopted. The
petitioner relied upon CBDT clarifications recognizing pendency of
miscellaneous applications and arbitration proceedings as qualifying
proceedings under the scheme.
Respondent’s Arguments
The Revenue argued that no appeal, writ petition, or special
leave petition was pending as on the specified date, since the SLP had already
been disposed of on 05.03.2019. It was contended that a review petition is
distinct from an appeal and does not fall within the definition of “pending
appeal” under the DTVSV Act.
Court Order / Findings
The Delhi High Court examined the Statement of Objects and
Reasons of the DTVSV Act and held that it is a beneficial and remedial
legislation intended to reduce tax litigation and unlock disputed revenue. The
Court observed that CBDT circulars had already diluted strict interpretation by
including arbitration proceedings and miscellaneous applications within the
ambit of the scheme.
The Court held that so long as the review petition was pending
on the cut-off date, the order of the Supreme Court had not attained finality.
A review petition partakes the character of pending proceedings and must be
treated as covered under the definition of “disputed tax” under Section
2(1)(j). The restrictive interpretation adopted by the Revenue was held to be
contrary to the intent and purpose of the legislation.
Important Clarification
The Court clarified that eligibility under the DTVSV Act must
be tested with reference to the status of proceedings as on the specified date.
Subsequent dismissal of the review petition is irrelevant for determining
eligibility under the scheme.
Final Outcome
The writ petition was allowed. The Delhi High Court set aside
the impugned rejection order dated 28.01.2021 and directed the Revenue to
accept the revised declaration filed by the petitioner under the DTVSV Act,
2020 and process the same in accordance with law. Pending applications were
disposed of accordingly.
Link to download the order - https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1769850821_NRAIRONANDSTEELPVTLTDVsINCOMETAXDEPARTMENTORS..pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge
purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from
reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment