Madras High Court
J.S.Rajasekaran vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 12 September, 2022
T.C.A Nos.360 and 361 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.09.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
Tax Case Appeal Nos. 360 and 361 of 2008
J.S.Rajasekaran .. Appellant in both
T.C.A.'s
Versus
Commissioner of Income-tax,
Central-II, Chennai. .. Respondent in both
T.C.A.'s
Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B”
Bench, Chennai dated 27.04.2007 passed in I.T.A. Nos.1392/Mds/2001 and
1426/Mds/2001.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Vasudevan
(in both Appeals)
For Respondent : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan
(in both Appeals) Senior Standing Counsel
Page 1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A Nos.360 and 361 of 2008
COMMON JUDGMENT
These Tax Case Appeals have been filed by the Appellant / Assessee
challenging the order dated 27.04.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Bench 'B', Chennai ('the Tribunal', for brevity) in
I.T.A.Nos.1392/Mds/2001 and 1426/Mds/2001 for the Assessment Year
1998-99.
2. By order dated 18.03.2008, this Court admitted the above Appeals
on the following substantial questions of law :
“1.Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the finding of the Tribunal
that Section 2(22)(e) is applicable is perverse without
considering the twin facts contemplated by the
section, namely, the amount should be loan/advance
and should be out of accumulated profits?
2.Whether the Tribunal is justified in its
conclusion that Section 2 (22)(e) applies even without
giving a finding that the amount withdrawn by the
appellant is from out of the accumulated profits of the
company [(within the meaning of Section 2 (22)(E)]?
3. Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified
in holding that the amounts withdrawn by the
appellant from the Bank accounts of the Company are
Page 2/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A Nos.360 and 361 of 2008
in the nature of loan and hence are assessable as
'deemed dividends' u/s 2 (22)(e) of the Act?
4. Whether on the facts and
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal ought to have
held that the reopening of assessment by issue of
notice u/s 148 during the pendency of regular
assessment proceedings is invalid in law, when there
cannot be any income escaping assessment and hence
the notice and the consequent assessment are
untenable in law?"
3.When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel
appearing for the Appellant / Assessee submitted that during the pendency of
this Tax Case Appeal, the Assessee has availed the benefit conferred under
the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and filed necessary declarations,
which were accepted and Form 5 / order for full and final settlement of tax
arrears, was also issued by the Income tax department, on 06.05.2021. The
learned counsel has also filed Form 5 dated 06.05.2021 to that effect.
4.The aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the
appellant/assessee has also been fairly conceded by the learned senior
standing counsel appearing for the Respondent/ Revenue.
Page 3/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A Nos.360 and 361 of 2008
S.VAIDYANATHAN, J.
and
C.SARAVANAN, J.
arr
5.In view of the subsequent development, this court is of the opinion
that nothing survives for adjudication in this appeal. Recording the
submission so made by the learned counsel on either side, these Tax Case
Appeals stands disposed of. No costs.
[S.V.N, J.] [C.S.N, J.]
12.09.2022
arr
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B” Bench
2. The Commissioner of Income-tax,
Central-II, Chennai.
T.C.A Nos.360 and 361 of 2008
Page 4/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A Nos.360 and 361 of 2008
Page 5/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
