M/S THE MYLAPORE CLUB vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

TCA.Nos.17 to 22 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 09.3.2021 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA Tax Case Appeal Nos.17 to 22 of 2018 and CMP.Nos.191 to 195 of 2018

M/s.The Mylapore Club, Chennai-4 ...Appellant Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Business Circle II, Chennai-34 new jurisdiction at the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle-2, Chennai-34. ...Respondent APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order dated 31.1.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai made in I.T.A.Nos.2887 to 2892/ Mds/2016 respectively for the assessment years from 2007-08 to 2012-13. For Appellant: Mr.V.S.Jayakumar For Respondent: Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC & Mr.J.Narayanaswamy, SSC 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.17 to 22 of 2018 COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by

T.S.SIVAGNANAM

,J)

These appeals have been filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) challenging the common order dated 31.1.2017 made in I.T.A.Nos.2887 to 2892/ Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai (for short, the Tribunal) respectively for the assessment years from 2007-08 to 2012-13. 2. The assessee has filed these appeals by raising the following substantial questions of law : “1. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the reassessment made under Section 147 is valid in law ? 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the interest income admitted by the appellant is liable to tax and that the principle of mutuality is not applicable on that income ? And 3. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the expenditure claimed by the appellant against the said interest income is not allowable?” 3. We have heard Mr.V.S.Jayakumar, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and Mr.T.Ravikumar and Mr.J.Narayanaswamy, 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.17 to 22 of 2018 learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 4. The learned counsel for the assessee submits that the assessee already filed the declaration/undertaking in the respective cases under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and orders were passed in Form No.3 respectively on 02.3.2021 in TCA.Nos.17 to 19 of 2018 and on 03.3.2021 in TCA.Nos.20 to 22 of 2018. 5. In the light of the subsequent event, the assessee is given liberty to restore these appeals in the event the ultimate decision taken in the respective cases on the declaration filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall entertain the prayer without insisting upon any petition to be filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appeals and on such request made by the assessee by filing miscellaneous petitions for restoration, the Registry shall place such petitions before the appropriate Division Bench for orders. 6. The tax case appeals stand disposed of with the aforementioned liberty. Consequently, the substantial questions of law raised are left open. No costs. Consequently, the connected CMPs are closed. RS 09.3.2021 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.17 to 22 of 2018 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND R.N.MANJULA,J RS

1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai. 2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle 2, Chennai-34 TCA.Nos.Nos.17 to 22 of 2018 & CMP.Nos.191 to 195 of 2018 09.3.2021 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in