Madras High Court
T.Jayachandran vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 21 January, 2021
Tax Case No.802 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.01.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI
Tax Case Appeal No.802 of 2010
and M.P.No.1 of 2010
T.Jayachandran ... Appellant
Vs.
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Business Circle VIII,
Chennai – 600 006. ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench,
dated 18.12.2009 passed in I.T.A.No.656/Mds/2009.
For Appellant : Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar
For Respondent : Ms.V.Pushpa,
Standing Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 1/6
Tax Case No.802 of 2010
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 18.12.2009
passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “A” Bench, Chennai
('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.656/Mds/2009 for the Assessment Year
2005-06. The assessee has raised the following Substantial Question of Law
for consideration:
“ 1) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right
in holding that the purchase and sale of derivatives fall within the
meaning of Speculative transaction under Section 43(5) of the
Income Tax Act, 1961?
2)Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in
law in holding that the derivatives which are intangibles fall
within the meaning of 'commodity' occurring in Section 43(5) of
the Income Tax Act, 1961?
3)Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in
law in holding that clause (d) of Section 43 (5) introduced by the
Finance Act, 2005 with effect from 01.04.2006 was not
clarificatory in nature?
4)Whether office expenditure can be treated as speculative
transaction under Section 43(5) of the Income Tax Act 1961?
2. We have heard Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar, learned counsel for the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 2/6
Tax Case No.802 of 2010
appellant/assessee and Ms.V.Pushpa, 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 28.12.2020 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 3/6
Tax Case No.802 of 2010
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
the aforementioned liberty and consequently, the Substantial Questions of Law
are left open. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
[M.D., J.] [T.V.T.S., J.]
Index : Yes/No 21.01.2021
Internet : Yes (1/2)
va
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 4/6
Tax Case No.802 of 2010
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Business Circle VIII,
Chennai – 600 006.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 5/6
Tax Case No.802 of 2010
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
va
Tax Case Appeal No.802 of 2010
and M.P.No.1 of 2010
(1/2)
21.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 6/6
