Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SHAKDHER, TALWANT SINGH
GE Capital European Treasury Services Limited – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's grievance regarding rectification of form-3 (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. clarification regarding tax payment and incorrect ay (Para 3) |
| 3. court's direction for rectification based on presented evidence (Para 4) |
| 4. conclusion directing the ao for rectification with deadlines (Para 5) |
JUDGMENT
[Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)--Via this writ petition, the substantive prayers made by the petitioner are hereunder:
"a. Writ of Mandamus or Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India directing the Respondent No.1 to rectify Form-3 dated 29.01.2021 by allowing credit of tax payment of Rs.19,05,21,564/-;
b. Ad-interim direction extending the due date of deposit of the tax under the VsV Scheme, i.e., 30.04.2021, to a date falling after the date of issuance of rectified Form-3;"
2. The writ petition came up for hearing for the first time on 27.04.2021, when we had, inter alia, recorded the following:
"2. The principal grievance of the petitioner-assessee appears to be the reluctance of respondent no.1 to re
The court directed the rectification of tax records under its supervisory jurisdiction, based on clear evidence that a significant tax payment was misattributed to the wrong assessment year.
The court's decision was based on the agreement between the parties regarding the correction of the challan and refund of Rs.25 lakhs without interest under the 2020 Act.
The amount deposited under the Income Declaration Scheme could not be forfeited and should be adjusted under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act.
Rectification orders under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act cannot be based on audit opinions or debatable issues, as they do not constitute a mistake apparent on the record.
The court affirmed the interpretation of 'disputed tax' and 'tax arrear' in the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, emphasizing that amounts including interest under Section 244A are recoverable if appe....
Point of Law : Income Tax- Permanent establishment – Pending Appeal is a Revenue Appeal, the first proviso of Section 3 of the DTVSV Act would become applicable and, accordingly, the amount payable b....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for actionable material and the significance of discrepancies in assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The conclusive nature of the certificate issued under Section 5(1) of the Scheme and the lack of provision for filing a revised declaration after the acceptance of the original declaration.
The court ruled that minor delays in tax payments under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act should not preclude benefits intended by the legislation, emphasizing a liberal interpretation of beneficia....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
