Madras High Court
M/S.Sakthi Sugars Ltd vs The Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 20 April, 2021
Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018
and
C.M.P.No.14515 of 2018
M/s.Sakthi Sugars Ltd.,
180, Course Road,
Coimbatore – 641 018. ... Appellant
Vs.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Corporate Range-1, Income Tax Office,
Coimbatore. ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras
"D" Bench, dated 13.01.2017 passed in I.T.A.No.430/Mds/2015.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan
for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan
For Respondent : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar
Senior Standing Counsel
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 1/5
Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directed against the order
dated 13.01.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras
"D" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.430/Mds/2015 for the
assessment year 2009-10. The appellant/assessee has raised the following
Substantial Questions of Law in the above appeal.
"1.Whether the order of the Tribunal refusing to
remit the additional evidence in the form of Ledger
accounts filed in support of claim of advances written off
to the Assessing Officer/CIT (Appeals) for fresh
consideration is perverse in law?
2.Whether the Triunal without considering the
Ledger Copies filed, erred in coming to a wrong
conclusion that in the absence of any evidence regarding
the genuineness and purpose of advance/loans and
confirmations from the borrowers or recipients of the
amount refused to remit the matter to AO/CIT(A) for fresh
consideration?
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 2/5
Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018
3.Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding
that the amount spent towards Goodwill in the nature of
advance given to farmers through Dhenkanal Water
User's Society for improving the irrigation facilities to
get adequate supply of sugarcane and written off as
irrecoverable advances is not allowable deduction u/s.37
or as business loss u/s.28(i) of the Act?”
2. We have heard Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.Subbaraya
Aiyar Padmanabhan, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and
Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the
respondent/Revenue.
3. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide the Substantial
Questions of Law framed for consideration on account of certain
subsequent developments. The Government of India enacted the Direct
Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) to provide for
resolution of disputed tax and for matters connected therewith or
incidental thereto. The Act of the Parliament received the assent of the
President on 17th March 2020 and published in the Gazette of India on
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 3/5
Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018
17th March 2020.
4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/
assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form-3 on
24.03.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of
this Court to withdraw the appeal.
5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the
appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
20.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
mkn
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Corporate Range-1, Income Tax Office,
Coimbatore.
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 4/5
Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R. HEMALATHA, J.
mkn
Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018
20.04.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 5/5
