THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. SHRI.BIPIN KHEMCHANDJI JAIN

Tax Case Appeal No.218 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 22.08.2022 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Tax Case Appeal No.218 of 2020 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai ... Appellant Vs. Shri Bipin Khemchandji Jain No.2/2, A Demellows Road, NMZ Complex, Choolai, Chennai 600 112 PAN:AACPB6588N

... Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “A” SMC Bench, Chennai, passed in I.T.A.No.2802/Chny/2018, dated 03.09.2019 for the assessment year 2011-12. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar Standing Counsel Page 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tax Case Appeal No.218 of 2020 J U D G M E N T (Judgment was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN,J.) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue challenging the order dated 03.09.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “A” SMC Bench, Chennai, ('the Tribunal', for brevity) in I.T.A.No.2802/Chny/2018 for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. On 20.08.2020, this Tax Case Appeal was admitted by this Court on the following substantial questions of law : "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in setting aside the well reasoned order passed by the Assessing Officer for re- examination, especially when the assessing officer had duly examined all the material placed while passing the assessment order? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in remitting the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer by quoting the decision in the case of Kanhaiyal & Sons (HUF) in ITA.No.1849/Chny/2014 Sunil Kumar Lalwani and that Aashesh Kumar Lalwani Page 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tax Case Appeal No.218 of 2020 wherein the onus has been shifted to the Revenue with a direction that the Assessing Officer is to bring on record the role of the assessee in promoting the company and the relation of the assessee if any with that of the promotors and role of inflating of prices, etc., which exercise had already been done by the Assessing Officer and the SEBI? And 3. Is not the finding of the Tribunal perverse especially when the decision of the Tribunal is contrary to the time tested principle that the person who asserts a fact has to discharge the initial burden cast upon him to show that the said facts are true and only thereafter the burden would shift to the Department?” 3.When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned Standing counsel appearing for the appellant / Revenue 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 5.4.2021. Page 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tax Case Appeal No.218 of 2020 4.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 for the appellant/Revenue, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of. No costs. [R.M.D.,J.] [M.S.Q.,J.] 22.08.2022

msr

Internet : Yes

Index : Yes / No To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “A” SMC Bench, Chennai 2.The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward -4(5), Chennai.

22.08.2022 Page 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis