Madras High Court
M/S.Rajanarayan Textiles Ltd vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax on 21 April, 2021
Tax Case No.208 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
Tax Case Appeal No.208 of 2013
M/s.Rajanarayan Textiles Ltd.,
No.70, Race Course Road,
Coimbatore – 641 018. ... Appellant
Vs.
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
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
"B" Bench, dated 12.12.2012 passed in I.T.A.No.1406/Mds/2012.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Kumar
For Respondent : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar,
Senior Standing Counsel
Page 1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case No.208 of 2013
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by M. DURAISWAMY, J)
The appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directed against the order dated
12.12.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "B"
Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A. 1406/Mds/2012 for
the Assessment Year 1995-96.
2.The above appeal was admitted on the following Substantial
Questions of Law for consideration:
“1)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in not
referring to and adjudicating the ground regarding limited
scope of the appeal proceedings before the Commissioner
(Appeals) pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the appellant's own case?
2)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in
disallowing the claim of expenditure on replacement of
machinery as revenue expenditure more so in the contest of
Page 2/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case No.208 of 2013
the latest Full Bench decision of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of CI TVs. Bojraj Textiles Mills Limited
and also another Bench decision of the Supreme Court in
the case of CIT Vs. Hindustan Textiles which was rendered
after the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT
Vs. Sri Mangayarkarasi Mills Pvt. Ltd. (315 ITR 114)?”
3. We have heard Mr.R.Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant/
assessee and Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for
the respondent/Revenue.
4. 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
17th March 2020.
Page 3/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case No.208 of 2013
5.We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/
assessee that the assessee has already been issued with Form – 3 on
29.01.2021 and seeks the permission of this Court to withdraw the appeal
with liberty.
6. In the light of the fact that the assessee has already availed the
benefit under the Act, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this
appeal pending. At the same time, safeguarding the interest of the
assessee in the event the order to be passed by the Department under the
Act is not in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal is
dismissed as withdrawn on the ground that the assessee has already been
issued with Form - 3 and the Department shall process the application at
the earliest in accordance with the said Act and communicate the
decision to the assessee at the earliest. As observed, the assessee is given
liberty to restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken
on the declaration filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is
not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall
Page 4/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case No.208 of 2013
entertain the prayer without insisting upon any application to be filed for
condonation of delay in restoration of the appeal and on such request
made by the assessee by filing a Miscellaneous Petition for Restoration,
the Registry shall place such petition before the Division Bench for
orders.
7. With this observation, the Tax Case Appeal is dismissed as
withdrawn with the aforementioned liberty and consequently, the
Substantial Questions of Law are left open. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [K.R., J.]
Index : Yes/No 21.04.2021
Internet : Yes
va
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "B" Bench
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Coimbatore.
Page 5/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case No.208 of 2013
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
va
Tax Case Appeal No.208 of 2013
21.04.2021
Page 6/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
