Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs M/S.Rajkumar Impex Private ... on 30 April, 2021
Tax Case Appeal No.864 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
Tax Case Appeal No.864 of 2013
Commissioner of Income-tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Rajkumar Impex Private Limited
B 603, Keshava Duar Apartments,
1, East Avenue, Kesavaperumalpuram,
R.A.Puram, Chennai – 600 028. ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai
"B" Bench, dated 11.02.2013 passed in I.T.A.No.1746/Mds/2012.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar
Senior Standing Counsel
and Mrs.R.Hemalatha
Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan
for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 1/5
Tax Case Appeal No.864 of 2013
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 11.02.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai
"B" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.1746/Mds/2012 for
the assessment year 2003-04. The above appeal has been admitted on
07.01.2014 on the following Substantial Questions of Law:
"1.Whether under the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in
holding that the disallowance made u/s.40A(3) shall form
part of the business income for the purpose of calculating
deduction under Section 80HHC and 80IA of the Income
Tax Act?
2.Whether under the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in
holding that the deduction under Section 80IA should not be
exceeded while working out eligible profits for deduction
under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act?”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 2/5
Tax Case Appeal No.864 of 2013
2. We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing
Counsel and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Standing Counsel for the
appellant/Revenue and Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.Subbaraya
Aiyar Padmanabhan, learned counsel 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 counsel for the respondent/assessee submitted that the
assessee had availed the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and that the
respondent/assessee had already been issued with Form–5 on
22.04.2021.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 3/5
Tax Case Appeal No.864 of 2013
5.Since the respondent/assessee had been issued with Form-5,
nothing survives for adjudication in the above appeal. Recording the
submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent/assessee, the
Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
30.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
mkn
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai "B" Bench
2.The Commissioner of Income-tax,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 4/5
Tax Case Appeal No.864 of 2013
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R. HEMALATHA, J.
mkn
Tax Case Appeal No.864 of 2013
30.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 5/5
