COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECH
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted the submission of the Revenue's counsel that the main appeals had already been disposed of by the ITAT. Consequently, the Revenue stated that these appeals were not pressed. In light of this subsequent development during the pendency of the appeals, the High Court found that the necessity to decide the substantial question of law raised by the Revenue would not arise, as the issue had become academic. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed as infructuous, and the substantial question of law was left open. No costs were awarded. The connected CMPs were also dismissed.
What were the facts?
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central IV, Chennai (the Revenue) filed three Tax Case Appeals (TCA.Nos.132 to 134 of 2016) before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. These appeals challenged the common order dated 05.06.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai 'B' Bench, in S.P.Nos.348 to 350/2015, which were in relation to ITA.Nos.294 to 296/Mds/2014. The assessment years involved were 2002-03 to 2004-05. The appeals were filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue also filed connected Civil Miscellaneous Petitions (CMP.Nos.1958 & 1959 of 2016).
What were the issues?
1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in extending interim order of stay beyond statutory period of 365 days as prescribed under Third Proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act? (Question of law) The Revenue contended that the main appeals before the ITAT had already been disposed of, rendering these appeals not pressed. The Revenue did not provide any further arguments on the substantial question of law. The Assessee (M/s.Vellore Institute of Technology) did not record any arguments in the judgment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
TCA.Nos.132 to 134 of 2016 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 06.7.2020 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal Nos.132 to 134 of 2016 & CMP.Nos.1958 & 1959 of 2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central IV, Chennai-34 ...Appellant Vs M/s.Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore-1. ...Respondent APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order dated 05.6.2015 made in S.P.Nos.348 to 350/2015 in respectively in ITA.Nos.294 to 296/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment years 2002-03 to 2004-05 respectively. For Appellant: Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, SC For Respondent: Ms.J.Srividhya COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by
T.S.Sivagnanam,J)
We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.132 to 134 of 2016 assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue and Ms.J.Srividhya, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act), are directed against the common order dated 05.6.2015 made in S.P.Nos.348 to 350/2015 in respectively in ITA.Nos.294 to 296/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment years 2002-03 to 2004-05. 3. The Revenue filed these appeals by raising the following substantial question of law : “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in extending interim order of stay beyond statutory period of 365 days as prescribed under Third Proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue submits that the main appeals themselves had already been disposed of by the Tribunal and hence, these appeals filed by the Revenue are not pressed. 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.132 to 134 of 2016 5. The said submission of the learned Senior Standing Counsel is recorded. 6. In view of the subsequent development, which took place during the pendency of these appeals, the necessity to decide the substantial question of law raised, would not arise, as the issue has become academic. 7. Accordingly, the above tax case appeals are dismissed as infructuous and the substantial question of law is left open. No costs. Consequently, the connected CMPs are also dismissed. 06.7.2020 To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench. RS 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.132 to 134 of 2016 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J RS TCA.Nos.132 to 134 of 2016 & CMP.Nos.1958 & 1959 of 2016 06.7.2020 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026