ORDER :

(Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J.) :

Heard finally with the consent of both the parties.

In the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks to challenge the orders dated 31.03.2021 as also the order dated 15.04.2021 passed by the Designated Authority (Respondent No.1) under the Direct Tax Vivaad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as “DTVSV Act, 2020 or 'Scheme') whereby the said authority has rejected the declaration filed by the deceased assessee Smt. Sumitra Raje Dalvi on the ground that the condition regarding pendency of appeal as on 31.01.2020 is not satisfied.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the son of Smt. Sumitra Raje Dalvi and the same has been filed in the capacity as her legal heir. The deceased mother was a regular income tax assessee and was filing her income tax returns regularly. The present matter relates to Assessment Year 2012-13 relevant to Financial Year 2011-12 in respect of which an order under Section 143(3) r/w Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Income Tax Act”) was passed by the Income Tax Officer – 2(3), Indore vide her order dated 25.12.2019. The said order was passed during the lifetime of the original assessee.

3. Meanwhile and prior to filing of the appeal against the order dated 25.12.2019, the Finance Act 2020 introduced a scheme known as “The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020” mainly for settlement of the disputed arrears of taxes and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. According to the said scheme, an assessee whose appeal, writ petition or special leave petition is pending as on 31.01.2020 before any appellate forum or in whose case, the period of limitation for filing appeal has not expired on 31.01.2020 was eligible to file a declaration under the scheme and was entitled to settle the disputed amount of arrears of taxes in accordance with the scheme. The original time for filing the declaration under the scheme was upto 31.03.2020. However, the period was extended from time to time and ultimately the last date was 31.03.2021. As per the scheme, to take the benefit of the same, could be availed subject to the condition that the appeal is pending on 31.01.2020 or the time for filing appeal has not expired on that day i.e. 31.01.2020. Thereafter, a clarificatory Circular No. 21 of 2020 dated 04.12.2020 was issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes clarifying that in all the cases where the limitation for filing appeals had expired between the period from 01.04.2019 to 31.01.2020 but appeals have been filed alongwith the application for condonation of delay which were pending before the issuance of the said circular dated 04.12.2020 would become eligible to file declaration under the scheme, subject to the condition that the delay has been condoned by the Appellate Authority prior to filing of such declaration.

4. Admittedly, the case of the petitioner is covered by the above clarification since the limitation for filing the appeal in this case had expired on 28.01.2020 i.e. between the period from 01.04.2019 to 31.01.2020. The petitioner had filed the appeal alongwith the application for condonation of delay on 24.11.2020 i.e. before the date of circular dated 04.12.2020, therefore, she was entitled to file declaration under the scheme and as a consequence a declaration under the scheme was filed vide application dated 18.12.2020 with the expectation that application for condonation of delay would be considered and decided by the appellate authority before final decision on the declaration.

5. The designated authority (Respondent No. 1) under the scheme rejected the petitioner's declaration on the ground that the appeal was not pending on 31.01.2020. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Respondent No. 1 erred in holding that the petitione