Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act – Scope of – Meaning of disputed tax – Difference between disputed tax and disputed income – Appeal against levy of tax pending – Declaration filed under Act cannot be rejected on ground that assessee had offered an amount for taxation

Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act – Scope of – Meaning of disputed tax – Difference between disputed tax and disputed income – Appeal against levy of tax pending – Declaration filed under Act cannot be rejected on ground that assessee had offered an amount for taxation

The assessee filed a return of income for the A.Y. 2014-15 u/s 139(1) declaring a total income of Rs. 67,55,710. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) assessing the income at Rs. 67,66,640. Thereafter, in 2019, a survey action was undertaken at the office premises of the assessee. However, no incriminating material was found. Under pressure, the assessee agreed to offer the amount of Rs. 5,76,00,000 allegedly received as his income. Later, he retracted from his statement under an affidavit filed before respondent No. 2. The assessment for the assessment year was reopened by a notice issued u/s 148. The assessee filed a return showing the amount of Rs. 5,76,00,000 as his income and declared a total amount of Rs. 6,43,69,719 and on reassessment the total amount was assessed at Rs. 6,44,09,400. The assessee filed an appeal u/s 246A before the Commissioner (Appeals) and raised the ground that the respondent had erred in taxing the amount of Rs. 5,76,00,000 as income of the assessee for the relevant assessment year. The appeal was pending. During the pendency of the appeal, the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 was enacted. As required under the provisions of this Act, the assessee filed a declaration to the designated authority in the prescribed form. The declaration was rejected on the online portal without giving an opportunity to the assessee observing that there was no disputed tax in the case of the declarant, as the declarant had himself filed a return reflecting the income.

The Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the assessee and held as under:

‘i) The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 and the rules have been brought out with a specific purpose, object and intention to expedite realisation of locked up revenue, providing certain reliefs to assessees who opt to apply under the Act. Such an option is available only to a few persons. The preamble to the Act provides for resolution of disputed tax and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The emphasis is on disputed tax and not on disputed income. The term “disputed tax” has been assigned specific definition in the Act and would have to be appreciated in the context of the Act. The disputed tax means an income tax payable by assessee under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on the income assessed by the authority and where any appeal is pending before the appellate forum on the specified date, against any order relating to tax payable under the Income-tax Act. It does not presumably ascribe any qualification to the matter / appeal except that it should concern the Income-tax Act. Further the definition of “dispute” as appearing under Rule 2(b) of the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Rules, 2020 shows that “dispute” means an appeal or writ petition or special leave petition by the declarant before the appellate forum. “Disputed income” has also been defined under clause (g) of section 2(1) to mean the whole or so much of the total income as is relatable to disputed tax.

ii) The scheme of the 2020 Act does not make any distinction and categorise the appeals. The Act does not go into the ground of appeal.

iii) The Department did not dispute that an appeal had been filed by the assessee before the appellate forum. There existed a dispute as referred to under the 2020 Act and the Rules. In such a scenario, the Department’s contention that the assessee had offered the income and as such the tax thereon could not be considered disputed tax, would not align itself with the object and the purpose underlying the bringing in of the 2020 Act. The rejection of the declaration under the 2020 Act was not valid.’