Madras High Court
K. Meenakshisundraam vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax on 1 February, 2021
Tax Case Appeal Nos. 44 and 45 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE: 01.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
T.C.A.Nos.44 & 45 of 2011
K. Meenakshisundraam ... Appellant in both TCA
v.
The Commissioner of Income Tax.
Chennai II,
Chennai ... Respondent in both TCA
Appeals preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
against the common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai,
''D'' Bench, dated 05.01.2009 in I.T(ss)A.No.118/Mds/2007 &
I.T(ss)A.No.124/Mds/2007 for the Assessment Years 1989-90 to 2001-02.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Vasudevan
(in both TCA)
For Respondent : Ms. S. Premalatha
(in both TCA) Standing Counsel
Page 1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos. 44 and 45 of 2011
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M. DURAISWAMY, J.)
These appeals, filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) are directed against the common
order dated 05.01.2009 made in I.T(ss)A.No.118/Mds/2007 &
I.T(ss)A.No.124/Mds/2007 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Chennai, ''D'' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Assessment
Years 1989-90 to 2001-02.
2.The appeals were admitted on 31.01.2011 on the following
substantial questions of law:
" (i) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in rejecting the
claim of bad debt of Rs.54,58,186/- being the amount of
credit sales of jewellery shown as sundry debtors in the
loose slips found in the course of search and outstanding on
the date of search?
(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
Page 2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos. 44 and 45 of 2011
the case the conclusion of the Tribunal on the disallowance
of claim of loss of Rs.6,55,143/- is perverse, though they
were relatable only to the search material and not recorded
in the books of the assessee even according to the assessing
officer?
(iii) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in its conclusion
that the amount of Rs.8,98,942/- wasthe UDI of the assessee
considering that there was no search material to any such
unexplained family expenses but was based only on the
statement recorded from the assessee?"
3. We have heard Mr.T.Vasudevan, learned counsel for the appellant
and Ms. S. Premalatha, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.
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
Page 3/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos. 44 and 45 of 2011
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 in both the cases, the assessee has already filed the requisite Form 1 on
27.01.2021 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 this
appeals 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 Appeals
stand disposed of on the ground that the assessee has already filed
requisite Form 1 in both the cases and the Department shall process the
applications 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
Page 4/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos. 44 and 45 of 2011
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
appeals 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 these observations, the Tax Case Appeals stand disposed of
with the aforementioned liberty and Consequently, the Substantial
Questions of Law are left open. No costs.
(M.D.,J.) (T.V.T.S.,J.)
18.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
Rj
To
Page 5/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos. 44 and 45 of 2011
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai 'D' Bench, Chennai,
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax.
Chennai II,
Page 6/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos. 44 and 45 of 2011
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
Rj
T.C.A.Nos.44 & 45 of 2011
18.02.2021
Page 7/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
