M/S.MANGAL TIRTH ESTATES LIM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER O

PDF · subscribers
TCA/147/2020HC Madras09 March 2020Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice M. SATHYANARAYANAN2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was dismissed as infructuous. The reasoning was based on the submission by the assessee's counsel that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had recalled its order dated 27.03.2019 based on an application filed by the assessee. Consequently, there was nothing remaining for adjudication in the appeal. The Court also observed that if the respondent/revenue were to file an appeal against the order of recall, it would be open to the appellant/assessee to defend the same. No costs were awarded. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Mangal Tirth Estates Limited, filed a Tax Case Appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. The appeal challenged an order dated 27.03.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai. The procedural history indicates that the assessee filed an application before the ITAT to recall its order. The ITAT recalled its order dated 27.03.2019. The assessee's counsel submitted that due to the recall of the ITAT order, nothing remains for adjudication in the present appeal. The revenue stated that no appeal had been filed against the order of recall.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is maintainable when the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which is under challenge, has been recalled by the Tribunal itself. Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that since the impugned order of the ITAT has been recalled, there is nothing left for adjudication in the present appeal before the High Court, rendering the appeal infructuous. Revenue's contention: The revenue stated that as of the date of the hearing, no appeal had been filed by the revenue against the order of recall passed by the ITAT. The revenue did not present any arguments on the merits of the original ITAT order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

TCA.No.147 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 09.03.2020 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. SATHYANARAYANAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE TCA.No.147 of 2020 M/s.Mangal Tirth Estates Limited 769, Spencer Plaza, Anna Salai Chennai 600 002. .. Appellant Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 4[1], Chennai.

.. Respondent PRAYER:- Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to set aside the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 27.03.2019 in ITA.No.1965/Chny/2018. For Appellant : Mr.N.V.Balaji For Respondent : Mr.Karthick Ranganathan for Mr.S.Rajesh JUDGMENT [Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.SATHYANARAYANAN,J.,] (1)Learned counsel for the appellant/assessee, on instructions, would submit that the impugned order dated 27.03.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [C Bench], Chennai, came to be recalled based on the application filed by the appellant/assessee and as such, nothing 1/2 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.147 of 2020 M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J., AND ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J., AP remains for adjudication in this appeal. It is also pleaded by the learned counsel that in the event of the respondent/Revenue files an appeal against the order of recall dated 24.02.2020, it may be granted an opportunity to contest the same. (2)Heard the learned counsel for the respondent/Revenue, who on instructions, would submit that as on date, no appeal is filed against the order of recall. (3)In the considered opinion of the Court, as and when such an appeal is filed by the respondent/Revenue, it is always open to the appellant/assessee to defend the same. (4)In the light of the said development, the present Tax Case Appeal is dismissed as infructuous subject to the above observation. No costs. [M.S.N.,J] [A.Q., J] 09.03.2020 AP Internet : Yes To The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 4[1], Chennai. TCA.No.147 of 2020 2/2 http://www.judis.nic.in

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →