Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 10257 Mad
Judgement Date : 21 April, 2021
Tax Case Appeal No.709 of 2016
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.709 of 2016
Shri M.R. Durai Raj
222, Dr. Radhakrishnan Road,
Coimbatore – 641 012. ... Appellant
Vs.
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Circle – 1(3),
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 26.04.2016 passed in I.T.A.No.2510/Mds/2014,
Assessment Year 2007-08.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan
for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan
For Respondent : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar
Senior Standing Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 1/5
Tax Case Appeal No.709 of 2016
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 26.04.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras
"D" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.2510/Mds/2014 for
the assessment year 2007-08. The above appeal has been admitted on
03.10.2016 on the following Substantial Questions of Law:
"1.Whether the Tribunal was right in not holding that the value of property allotted to the Assessee in the course of settlement with his brothers should be the fair market value of property given up by the Assessee in exchange for the property allotted to him?
2.Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of Section 49 of the Act should be invoked for determination of the cost of acquisition in the exchange of properties between the co-owners?”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page 2/5 Tax Case Appeal No.709 of 2016
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
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
08.04.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of
this Court to withdraw the appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page 3/5 Tax Case Appeal No.709 of 2016
5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the
appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [K.R., J.]
21.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
mkn
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle – 1(3), Coimbatore.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page 4/5 Tax Case Appeal No.709 of 2016
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
mkn
Tax Case Appeal No.709 of 2016
21.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page 5/5
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!