Madras High Court
M/S. International Flavours & ... vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income ... on 3 February, 2021
T.C.A.No.70 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03.02.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI
Tax Case Appeal No. 70 of 2017
M/s. International Flavours & Fragrances
India P. Ltd.,
No.1-5, Seven Wells Street,
St. Thomas Mount,
Chennai – 600 016. ... Appellant
v.
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Large Taxpayer Unit,
Chennai – 600 101. ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax
Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B”
Bench, Chennai dated 15.02.2016 passed in I.T.A.No.1387/Mds/2014 for
the Assessment Year 2006-07.
Page 1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.70 of 2017
For Appellant : Mr. Sandeep Bagmar
for Mr. S.P.Chidambaram
For Respondent : Mr. T.Ravikumar
Standing Counsel
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was 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 15.02.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B”
Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.1387/Mds/2014
for the Assessment Year 2006-07.
2. The appeal was admitted on 14.02.2007 on the following
Substantial Questions of Law:
“(i) Whether in the facts and in the circumstances
of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in
confirming the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of
the Act?
Page 2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.70 of 2017
(ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the
case and in law, claim of deduction on account of
payment of gratuity in the computation of total income
could tantamount to “furnishing of inaccurate
particulars of income”so as to attract levy of penalty
under section 271(1) of the Act especially in a case
where said item was mentioned in the tax audit report?”
.3. We have heard Mr. Sandeep Bagmar, learned counsel for the
appellant and Mr. T.Ravikumar, 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 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.
Page 3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.70 of 2017
5. We are informed by the learned counsel for the
appellant/assessee that the assessee has already filed the requisite Forms
1 and 2 on 30.12.2020 under Section 4 of the Act and the Department
had also issued Form – 3 on 06.01.2021. Hence, the learned counsel
for the appellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the appeal.
6. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the
appellant, the Tax Case Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [T.V.T.S., J.]
26.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
Rj
To
1. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Large Taxpayer Unit,
Chennai – 600 101.
2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai, ''B'' Bench
Page 4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.70 of 2017
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
Rj
T.C.A.No.70 of 2017
01.02.2021
Page 5/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
