Madras High Court
M/S.Ramgosri Constructions P. ... vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income ... on 4 February, 2021
Tax Case Appeal Nos.203 & 214 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.02.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI
Tax Case Appeal Nos.203 & 214 of 2013
M/s.Ramgosri Constructions P. Ltd.,
No.225, Mettukuppam,
Okkiam, Thoraipakkam,
Chennai – 600 096. ... Appellant in both TCAs
Vs.
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Circle – V(3),
Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondent in both TCAs
Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax
Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Madras "C" Bench, dated 25.02.2011 passed in I.T.A.Nos.2047 &
2048/Mds/ 2010.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Kaushik
for Mr.S.Sridhar
For Respondent : Mr.T.Ravikumar
Senior Standing Counsel
Page 1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos.203 & 214 of 2013
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
These appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), are directed against the
order dated 25.02.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Madras "C" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.Nos.2047 &
2048/Mds/2010 for the assessment years 2003-04 & 2006-07. The
assessee has raised the following Substantial Questions of Law:
“1)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law
in accepting the appeal (s) of the department/respondent
exparte relating to the assessment years 2003-04 & 2006-
07 without granting reasonable opportunity of hearing
while grossly violating the principles of natural justice?
2)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in
rejecting the please for claim of business loss which loss
was set off against the property income earned in the
computation of taxable total income relating to the
assessment year 2003-04 without considering relevant
materials while overlooking the findings of the CIT
(Appeals) which resulted in perversity in the order passed
by them?
Page 2/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos.203 & 214 of 2013
3)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in
rejecting the plea for claim of business loss which loss was
set off against the property income earned in the
computation of taxable total income relating to the
assessment year 2006-07 without considering relevant
materials while overlooking the findings of the CIT
(Appeals) which resulted in perversity in the order passed
by them?
4)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in
rejecting the issues on the allowability of expenses in the
computation of business loss which was so presumed
legally in view of the non consideration of the said issues,
which issues relating to the incurring of expenses were
considered and allowed by the CIT (Appeals) in the
computation of business loss which loss was sought to be
set off against property income earned in the computation
of taxable total income, resulting in perversity in the order
passed by them?”
2. We have heard Mr.M.Kaushik, learned counsel for the appellant/
assessee and Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the
respondent/Revenue.
Page 3/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos.203 & 214 of 2013
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. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/
assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form – 3 on
28.01.2021 in respect of T.C.A.No.203 of 2013 and on 21.01.2021 in
respect of T.C.A.No.214 of 2013 and the learned counsel for the
appellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the appeals.
Page 4/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos.203 & 214 of 2013
5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the
appellant, the Tax Case Appeals stand dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [T.V.T.S., J.]
Index : Yes/No 04.02.2021
Internet : Yes
va
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Circle – V(3),
Chennai – 600 034.
Page 5/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos.203 & 214 of 2013
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
va
Tax Case Appeal Nos.203 & 214 of 2013
04.02.2021
Page 6/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
