| Case ID |
267745c7-2002-4137-8e54-ac31b3a3c481 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 4403-4410 OF 2003 |
| Decision Date |
Sep 01, 2005 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the assessee, quashing the orders of the designated authority that rejected the declarations concerning revisions filed by the assessee under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme. The court held that appeals, revisions, and references were to be treated equally under section 95(i)(c) of the Scheme, which aimed to end litigation in various forms under the Income-tax Act and Wealth-tax Act. It emphasized that the department could not dismiss pending appeals or revisions as sham, ineffective, or infructuous. This significant decision reinforced the applicability of the Scheme, aimed at resolving tax disputes effectively. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shatrusailya Digvijaysingh Jadeja, the Supreme Court addressed the applicability of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998. The case involved the rejection of declarations by the department concerning revisions under the Scheme, which were argued to be time-barred. The Court held that under section 95(i)(c) of the Scheme, appeals, references, and revisions should be treated equally, promoting an end to ongoing litigation. This ruling clarified the interpretation of pending appeals and emphasized the Scheme's purpose to resolve tax disputes efficiently. The judgment is pivotal in tax law, reinforcing the rights of taxpayers to seek relief under the Scheme without the department dismissing their claims as insincere. The decision aligns with the objectives of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, which was instituted to facilitate the resolution of pending tax matters. Keywords: tax law, litigation settlement, Supreme Court, Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, tax disputes resolution. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of India
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
B.P. Singh,
S.H. Kapadia
|
| Lawyers |
K.P. Pathak,
Harish Chander,
Tufail A. Khan,
B.V. Balaram Das,
M.L. Varma,
Bhargava V. Desai,
Sanjeev Kr. Singh,
Ms. Sheenam Parwanda,
Satya Mitra
|
| Petitioners |
Commissioner of Income Tax
|
| Respondents |
Shatrusailya Digvijaysingh Jadeja
|
| Citations |
2005 SLD 2548,
(2005) 277 ITR 435
|
| Other Citations |
Dr. Mrs. Renuka Datla v. CIT [2003] 259 ITR 258/126 Taxman 427,
Raja Kulkarni v. State of Bombay AIR 1954 SC 73,
Tirupati Balaji Developers (P.) Ltd. v. State of Bihar [2004] 5 SCC 1,
Computwel Systems (P.) Ltd. v. W. Hasan [2003] 260 ITR 86/129 Taxman 67
|
| Laws Involved |
Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998
|
| Sections |
95
|