Madras High Court
S. Kalyankumar vs Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax on 15 June, 2021
Tax Case Appeal Nos.711 to 715 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.06.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
Tax Case Appeal Nos.711 to 715 of 2021
S. Kalyankumar ... Appellant in all the TCAs
v.
Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Circle - 1 (2).
Chennai - 600 034. ... Respondent in all the TCAs
COMMON PRAYER: Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of
the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the orders of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench, dated 12.12.2013 passed in
I.T.A.Nos.1990 to 1994/Mds/2012.
For Appellant in all the TCAs : Mrs.Sri Niranjani
For Respondent in all the TCAs : Mrs.V. Pushpa
Senior Counsel
Page 1/5
Tax Case Appeal Nos.711 to 715 of 2015
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
These appeals are filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), are directed against the
order dated 12.12.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Madras "A" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.Nos.1990 to
1994/Mds/2012 for the assessment years 2003-2004, 2004-2005, 2005-
2006, 2007-2008 and 2008-2009.
2. The appeal was admitted on the following substantial
questions of law :-
" Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal is right in restoring the penalty
under Sec.271(1) (c ), when the sworn statements recorded
clearly show that the income was earned by the
appellant's father-in-law and invested in the name of the
appellant?
2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal is right in restoring the penalty
under S.271(1) (c ), when the additions had been made
only on the basis of the offer made by the appellant's
father-in-law in good faith and to avoid litigation?
3. Whether Explanation 5A to Sec.271(1) (c ) is
applicable to a situation where there was no finding by the
Page 2/5
Tax Case Appeal Nos.711 to 715 of 2015
Department that the assessee was the owner of any money
bullion, jewellery or valuable investment etc., not
disclosed to the department; but additions were made only
on the basis of offer by the assessee's father-in-law?”
3. We have heard Mrs.Sri Niranjani, learned counsel for the
appellant/assessee and Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned Senior Counsel for the
respondent/Revenue.
4. 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.
5. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/
assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form-3 on
10.12.2020 and the learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of
Page 3/5
Tax Case Appeal Nos.711 to 715 of 2015
this Court to withdraw the appeal.
6. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the
appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
15.06.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
gv
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench
2.Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Circle - 1 (2).
Chennai - 600 034.
Page 4/5
Tax Case Appeal Nos.711 to 715 of 2015
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R.HEMALATHA, J.
gv
Tax Case Appeal Nos.711 to 715 of 2021
15.06.2021
Page 5/5
