Madras High Court
R.Swarna vs The Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 4 February, 2021
Tax Case No.168 of 2016
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 No.168 of 2016
R.Swarna ... Appellant
Vs.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Central Circle I(3),
No.108, Mahatma Gandhi Salai,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. ... 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 30.04.2009 passed in I.T.A.No.2370/Mds/2007.
For Appellant : Mr.N.Devanathan
For Respondent : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar,
Senior Standing Counsel
JUDGMENT
Page 1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case No.168 of 2016
(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 30.04.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras
“B” Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.2370/Mds/
2007 for the Assessment Year 2003-04. The above appeal was admitted
on 29.03.2016 on the following Substantial Questions of Law for
consideration:
“1)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Assessing Officer has jurisdiction to decide
the issue in the absence of recording of satisfaction under
Section 153C of the Act?
2)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in
confirming the penalty under Section 271 (1)(c) of the Act
and also on the basis of admission by the third party?
3)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, in the absence of finding as to the sum added, it
represents and partakes the character of income for
imposition of penalty?
4)Without prejudice, whether on the facts and in the
Page 2/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case No.168 of 2016
circumstances of the case, the assessing officer was
justified in refusing to exercise the discretion as mandated
in terms of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act?”
2. We have heard Mr.N.Devanathan, learned counsel for the
appellant/assessee and Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior 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 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/
Page 3/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case No.168 of 2016
assessee that the assessee has already filed the requisite Forms - 1 & 2 on
25.12.2020 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 this
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 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 Forms 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,
Page 4/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case No.168 of 2016
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
Question of Law is left open. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [T.V.T.S., J.]
Index : Yes/No 04.02.2021
Internet : Yes (1/3)
va
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "B" Bench
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Central Circle I(3),
No.108, Mahatma Gandhi Salai,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.
Page 5/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case No.168 of 2016
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
va
Tax Case Appeal No.168 of 2016
(1/3)
04.02.2021
Page 6/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
