Facts of the Case

The appellant, Shanghai Electric Group Company Limited, filed multiple income tax appeals before the Delhi High Court challenging orders passed by the Income Tax Authorities. These appeals (ITA Nos. 639/2017, 717/2017, 718/2017, 720/2017, 721/2017, 722/2017, 723/2017, and 922/2017) pertained to disputes arising under the Income Tax Act.

At the time of hearing, it was submitted on behalf of the appellant that the disputes involved in the present appeals had been amicably resolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, introduced as an amnesty scheme by the Government of India for settlement of pending tax disputes.

 Issues Involved


  1. Whether the appeals should continue when the dispute has been resolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
  2. Whether such appeals become infructuous upon settlement under the amnesty scheme.

 

Petitioner’s (Appellant’s) Arguments

  • The appellant submitted that all pending disputes forming the subject matter of the appeals had been settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
  • It was argued that, in light of such settlement, the appeals no longer survive and should be disposed of as infructuous.

 

Respondent’s Arguments

  • The respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax), represented by counsel, did not oppose the submission made by the appellant regarding settlement under the scheme.
  • The matter was left to the discretion of the Court in light of the settlement.

 

Court’s Findings / Order

The Delhi High Court, comprising Hon’ble Justice Manmohan and Hon’ble Justice Sanjeev Narula, observed that:

  • The disputes between the parties had been amicably resolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
  • Since the underlying issues no longer survived, the appeals had become infructuous.

Accordingly, all the appeals were disposed of as infructuous. 

Important Clarification

  • Once a taxpayer opts for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, pending appeals relating to the settled disputes lose their relevance.
  • Courts generally dispose of such matters as infructuous, without adjudicating on merits.
  • This case reinforces the procedural consequence of opting for dispute resolution schemes in tax litigation.

Section Involved

  • Income Tax Act, 1961 (Appeals under Section 260A)
  • Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 (Dispute Resolution / Amnesty Scheme)

Link to download the order -https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/case_number_pdf/2020:DHC:3903-DB/MMH22122020ITA6392017_160435.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.