Madras High Court
N.Easwaran vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 20 January, 2021
Tax Case No.855 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20.01.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI
Tax Case Appeal No.855 of 2017
N.Easwaran ... Appellant
Vs.
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Coimbatore. ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai "A" Bench,
dated 26.10.2016 passed in I.T.A.No.2117/Mds/2016.
For Appellant : Mr.Kumar,
for Mr.T.N.Seetharaman
For Respondent : Ms.G.G.Usha Rani, Standing Counsel,
for Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar,
Standing Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 1/6
Tax Case No.855 of 2017
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by T.V. THAMILSELVI, 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 26.10.2016
passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai “A” Bench ('the
Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.2117/Mds/2016 for the Assessment Year
2012-13. The assessee has raised the following Substantial Question of Law
for consideration:
“ 1) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in not
following the binding judgment of the jurisdictional Madras High
Court in CIT Vs.S.Khader Khan Son (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad)
affirmed by the Supreme Court by order in CIT Vs. S.Khader
Khan Son (2013) 352 ITR 480 (SC) and relying on judgments of
other High Courts in a manner contrary to judicial propriety and
discipline?
2)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in acting
on the retracted confessional statement of the appellant,
uncorroborated by tangible material, which has no evidentiary
value and is also against the CBDT instructions on the subject?
3)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in
reversing the fair and reasoned order of the Commissioner
(Appeals) fixing the income with reference to comparable cases
and restoring the Assessing Officer's order adopting exaggerated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 2/6
Tax Case No.855 of 2017
rate of profit?”
2. We have heard Mr.Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant/ assessee
and Ms.K.G.Usha Rani, learned 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/assessee that
the assessee has already filed the declaration on 07.12.2020 under Section 4 of
the Act.
5. In the light of the fact that the assessee has already availed the benefit
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 3/6
Tax Case No.855 of 2017
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 a declaration 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 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 Division Bench for orders.
6. With this observation, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 4/6
Tax Case No.855 of 2017
the aforementioned liberty and consequently, the Substantial Questions of Law
are left open. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [T.V.T.S., J.]
20.01.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
va
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai "A" Bench
2.Commissioner of Income Tax,
Coimbatore.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 5/6
Tax Case No.855 of 2017
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
va
Tax Case Appeal No.855 of 2017
20.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 6/6
