Madras High Court
M.Bhagiachand Gulecha vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 1 July, 2021
Tax Case Appeal No.488 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
Tax Case Appeal No.488 of 2015
M.Bhagiachand Gulecha,
No.390/2, Mint Street,
Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079. ... Appellant
Vs.
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-X, Chennai. ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras
"C" Bench, dated 28.08.2013 passed in I.T.A.No.1994/Mds/2011.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Vasudevan
For Respondent : Mr.T.Ravikumar
Senior Standing Counsel
and Mrs.R.Hemalatha
Standing Counsel
Page 1/5
Tax Case Appeal No.488 of 2015
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 28.08.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras
"C" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.1994/Mds/2011 for
the assessment year 2006-07. The above appeal has been admitted on
25.08.2015 on the following Substantial Questions of Law:
"1.Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct, in law, in
confirming the addition of Rs.12,00,000/- in the face of
sale agreement and bank statement evidencing the bona
fide of the transaction?
2.Whether the Tribunal was justified in confirming
the addition although the affidavit filed by Mr.Mahadevan
had not been dislodged by the officer with any other
relevant material?
3.Whether the Tribunal was correct, in law, in not
deleting the addition although the lack of sufficient
opportunity to produce him amounts to violation of
natural justice?”
Page 2/5
Tax Case Appeal No.488 of 2015
2. We have heard Mr.T.Vasudevan, learned counsel for the
appellant/assessee and Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing
Counsel and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, 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 had already been issued with Form-3 on
18.03.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of
this Court to withdraw the appeal.
Page 3/5
Tax Case Appeal No.488 of 2015
5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the
appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
01.07.2021
(3/4)
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
mkn
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-X, Chennai.
Page 4/5
Tax Case Appeal No.488 of 2015
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R. HEMALATHA, J.
mkn
Tax Case Appeal No.488 of 2015
01.07.2021
(3/4)
Page 5/5
