Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Dharmsee Paripia on 22 April, 2021
Tax Case Appeal No.465 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
Tax Case Appeal No.465 of 2015
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Dharmsee Paripia,
A-1, Hamra, No.1, Kothari Road,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai
"C" Bench, dated 13.02.2015 passed in I.T.A.No.2309/Mds/2014.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.Rahul Unnikrishnan
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 1/5
Tax Case Appeal No.465 of 2015
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directed against the order
dated 13.02.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai
"C" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.2309/Mds/2014 for
the assessment year 2010-11. The above appeal has been admitted on
22.07.2015 on the following Substantial Questions of Law:
"1.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the
disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of
short term capital loss of Rs.17,63,12,240/- is to be allowed
and to be treated as a genuine transaction?
2.Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad by holding
that there was no colourable device involved in setting off
the short term capital loss against the long term capital
gains especially when the assessee had invested
Rs.18,13,50,000/- in the shares of a loss making company
and sold the same within a period of 11 days after acquiring
it at the rate of 1/40th of the issue price?”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 2/5
Tax Case Appeal No.465 of 2015
2. We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing
Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.Rahul Unnikrishnan, learned
counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee.
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.Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant/Revenue
submitted that the respondent/assessee had availed the Vivad Se
Vishwas Scheme and that the respondent/assessee had already been
issued with Form–3 vide Reference No.973239070311220.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 3/5
Tax Case Appeal No.465 of 2015
5.Since the respondent/assessee had been issued with Form-3,
nothing survives for adjudication in the above appeal. Recording the
submission made by the learned Senior Counsel for the
appellant/Revenue, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [K.R., J.]
22.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
mkn
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai "C" Bench
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 4/5
Tax Case Appeal No.465 of 2015
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
mkn
Tax Case Appeal No.465 of 2015
22.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 5/5
