The Bombay High Court at Goa has directed the department to accept the declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (VsV Act).The bench of Justice M. S. Sonak and Justice Valmiki Sa Menezes has observed that the delay alleged on the part of the Petitioner is hardly 11 days. The alleged deficit payment, if any, is of hardly 2,21,862. However, even if it is assumed that there was some...
The Bombay High Court at Goa has directed the department to accept the declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (VsV Act).
The bench of Justice M. S. Sonak and Justice Valmiki Sa Menezes has observed that the delay alleged on the part of the Petitioner is hardly 11 days. The alleged deficit payment, if any, is of hardly 2,21,862. However, even if it is assumed that there was some marginal delay, this delay is attributable to the technical glitches and also the mistakes of the Respondents in processing the Petitioner's declaration.
The Petitioner/assessee filed a declaration under the VsV Act in Form 1 giving particulars of tax arrears and amounts payable in respect of the pending Income Tax dispute for Assessment Year 2017-18. Since the outstanding tax demand was 235,94,164/-, the amount under the VsV Act was computed at 14,04,620 after adjustment of the amount of 28,14,000, which the Petitioner already paid to the department.
The Petitioner pointed out that the figures were patently erroneous, and therefore, the Petitioner approached the Respondents to get the errors corrected. After numerous follow-ups by the Petitioner, the department acknowledged their error and assured the Petitioner that the fresh Form 3 under the VsV Act would be issued to the Petitioner.
The Petitioner has pleaded that in June 2021 or thereabouts, the department closed their old website and migrated to a new website. The Petitioner has pleaded that, as a result, there were several technical glitches in accessing the new website. The Petitioner has pleaded that this technical error continued beyond September 2021. As a result, the Petitioner was disabled from accessing the e-filing account until the first week of October 2021.
The department contended that there were no technical glitches, and Form 3 dated 01.09.2021 was uploaded on the same date, i.e. 01.09.2021 itself. She produced on record a printout from the website along with an acknowledgement to show that Form 3 was uploaded on the website on 01.09.2021 itself.
The court allowed the petition and directed the Petitioner to pay the balance amount of 2,21,862/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 31.10.2021 till the date of payment, which shall be within 21 days. The Petitioner shall pay an additional amount of 2,00,000/- to the department within 21 days.
Counsel For Petitioner: Rahul Sarda
Counsel For Respondent: Susan Linhares
Case Title: Neelam Ajit Versus ACIT
Case No.: W.P. No. 600/2023