Madras High Court
Smt.Vandana B.Dolia vs The Principal Commissioner Of on 19 January, 2021
TCA.No.42 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.1.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
Tax Case Appeal No.42 of 2021
Smt.Vandana B.Dolia ...Appellant
Vs
The Principal Commissioner of
Income Tax-8, Chennai ...Respondent
APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against
the order dated 28.12.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai made in M.A.No.223/Chny/2018 in
ITA.No.2724/Chny/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15.
For Appellant: Mr.N.V.Balaji
For Respondent: Mr.M.Swaminathan, SSC assisted by
Ms.V.Pushpa, JSC
Judgment was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J
This appeal has been filed by the assessee under Section 260A of
the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) challenging the order
dated 28.12.2018 made in M.A.No.223/Chny/2018 in ITA.No.2724/
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.42 of 2021
Chny/2017 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai,
'B' Bench ('the Tribunal' for brevity) for the assessment year 2014-15.
2. The assessee has filed this appeal by raising the following
substantial questions of law:
“i. Whether, under the facts and
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was
right in holding that the appellant is not
entitled for deduction under Section 80P?
ii. Whether, under the facts and
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was
right in holding that the appellant is not
entitled for deduction under Section 80P(2) as
it failed to satisfy the principle of mutuality ?
and
iii. Whether, under the facts and
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was
right in holding that principles of mutuality are
not present in the appellant's case and
therefore, the appellant is not eligible for
deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i)?”
3. We have heard Mr.N.V.Balaji, learned counsel appearing for
the appellant/assessee and Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior
Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Junior Standing
Counsel appearing for the respondent/Revenue.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.42 of 2021
4. The learned counsel on behalf of the appellant/assessee
submits that the appellant/assessee already filed the declaration/
undertaking under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme on 27.8.2020 and is
awaiting orders to be passed in Form No.3.
5. In the light of the subsequent event, the Competent Authority
shall process the application/declaration in accordance with the Direct
Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) and pass appropriate
orders as expeditiously as possible. 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 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, the Registry shall place such petition before the
appropriate Division Bench for orders.
6. The tax case appeal stands disposed of with the
aforementioned liberty. Consequently, the substantial questions of law
raised are left open. No costs.
19.1.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.42 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J
AND
R.N.MANJULA,J
RS
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai.
2.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8, Chennai.
TCA.No.42 of 2021
19.1.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
