No Scope for Rectification Once DTVSV Form 5 Is Issued: HC:

No Scope for Rectification Once DTVSV Form 5 Is Issued: HC

HC holds tax disputes settled under Vivad se Vishwas cannot be reopened via Section 154 rectification; directs refund with statutory interest.

HC: No Reopening of Settled Tax Dispute Under Vivad se Vishwas, Section 154 Action Quashed

authorMeetu KumaridateJul 11, 2025
Last update on Jul 11, 2025
No Scope for Rectification Once DTVSV Form 5 Is Issued: HC The taxpayer, a resident of Bhagalpur, had settled his disputed tax demand arising from a search assessment under Section 143(3)/153B through the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DTVSV). The authority issued a final certificate (Form 5), confirming closure of the dispute. Despite this, the Assessing Officer later issued a notice under Section 154, claiming an apparent mistake in the earlier computation, and sought to impose additional tax on supposed unexplained income under Sections 69/69A read with Section 115BBE. The petitioner’s request for a refund of excess tax was also rejected, leading to the filing of this writ petition.
ITAT Rejects Rs. 49.86 Cr Addition; Cash Deposits by Dairy Cooperative Not Unexplained Under Section 69A
Main Issue: Whether a tax liability previously settled under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 can be reopened or amended by an Assessing Officer using Section 154, and whether the finality of the settlement is violated if the excess payment is not refunded.
Big Relief for Property Sellers: Section 50C Won’t Apply If Circle Rate Matches Agreement Date
HC's Order: The High Court allowed the petition, ruling that once a settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act reaches finality through Form 5, the Assessing Officer cannot invoke Section 154 to reopen or modify the settled dispute. The Court observed that neither FAQs nor internal circulars could override the binding effect of the Act's provisions. Applying principles of legislative finality and fair procedure, the Court quashed the impugned rectification orders and directed the department to refund the petitioner’s excess tax within four weeks along with statutory interest. To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

About Author

Meetu Kumari

Content Manager

Meetu Kumari is an Experienced Advocate and Content Writer with 4+ years of demonstrated history of working in the law practice industry. Skilled in Developing Content, Researching, and Drafting. Strong professional with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) focused on Law from Gujarat National Law University.
Studycafe
Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
2157
Up Next

Loading suggestions…