Madras High Court
M/S.P.S.Apparels vs The Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 29 April, 2021
Tax Case Appeal No.838 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
Tax Case Appeal No.838 of 2008
M/s.P.S.Apparels,
#15, Race Course Road,
Guindy,
Chennai – 600 032. ... Appellant
Vs.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Business Circle-IV,
Chennai. ... 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 10.08.2007 passed in I.T.A.No.179/Mds/2006.
For Appellant : Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar
For Respondent : Mr.M.Swaminathan
Senior Standing Counsel
and Mrs.V.Pushpa
Standing Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 1/6
Tax Case Appeal No.838 of 2008
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 10.08.2007,
passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B” Bench, Chennai
('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.179/Mds/2006 for the Assessment Year
2002-03. The above appeal was admitted on 08.07.2008 on the following
Substantial Questions of Law:
"1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in
holding that the deduction u/s.80HHC of the Income Tax Act, has
to be computed on the profits of the business after reducing the
deduction allowed u/s.80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961?
2.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in not
appreciating that the deduction u/s.80HHC must be allowed first
and then the deduction u/s.80IA of the Act?”
2. We have heard Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar, learned counsel for the
appellant/ assessee and Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 2/6
Tax Case Appeal No.838 of 2008
and Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned 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 17 th 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 has already filed the requisite Forms 1 & 2 on 27.12.2020 under
Section 4 of the Act.
5. 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 the 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 stands disposed of on the
ground that the assessee has already filed the requisite Forms 1 & 2 and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 3/6
Tax Case Appeal No.838 of 2008
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 the 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 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.
6. With this observation, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of with
the aforementioned liberty and consequently, the Substantial Questions of Law
are left open. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
29.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
mkn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 4/6
Tax Case Appeal No.838 of 2008
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B” Bench
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Business Circle-IV,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 5/6
Tax Case Appeal No.838 of 2008
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R. HEMALATHA, J.
mkn
Tax Case Appeal No.838 of 2008
29.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 6/6
