Madras High Court
Subramaniam Vadivel vs The Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 4 February, 2021
Tax Case No.136 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 No.136 of 2013
Subramaniam Vadivel ... Appellant
Vs.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Business Circle VII ... 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 20.02.2013 passed in I.T.A.No.2118/Mds/2012.
For Appellant : Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy
For Respondent : Mr.Karthick Ranganathan,
Senior Standing Counsel
JUDGMENT
(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 20.02.2013
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 1/5
Tax Case No.136 of 2013
passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B” Bench, Chennai
('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.2118/Mds/2012 for the Assessment Year
2009-10. The above appeal was admitted on 21.03.2013 on the following
Substantial Questions of Law for consideration:
“1)Has not the Appellate Tribunal committed an error in
law in failing to apply the principles epoused by a Division Bench
of this Court in M.S.Srinivasa Naicker Vs. ITO reported in 292
ITR 481?
2)Whether the statement of the Village Administrative
Officer by itself is relevant and sufficient to rebut the
presumption created by revenue records indicating that the land in
question was agricultural land? ”
2. We have heard Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy, learned counsel for the
appellant/ assessee and Mr.Karthick Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing
Counsel for the respondent/ Revenue.
3. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide the Substantial
Question 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 2/5
Tax Case No.136 of 2013
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 has already filed the requisite Form - 1 on 29.05.2020 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 Form 1 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 3/5
Tax Case No.136 of 2013
condonation of delay in restoration of the appeal 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 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
va
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "B" Bench
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Business Circle VII.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 4/5
Tax Case No.136 of 2013
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
va
Tax Case Appeal No.136 of 2013
04.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 5/5
