M/S SRI VIGNESWARA FOUNDRY vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

TCA/240/2015HC Madras23 April 2021Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DURAISWAMY5 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Judicature at Madras decided not to adjudicate the substantial question of law framed for consideration. This decision was based on subsequent developments, specifically the enactment of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Court was informed that the assessee had been issued Form-3 under this Act, indicating a resolution of the disputed tax. Consequently, the assessee's counsel sought permission to withdraw the appeal. The Court granted this permission. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, and no decision was made on the merits of the substantial question of law. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Sri Vigneswara Foundry, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench, dated 26.09.2014. This order pertained to the assessment year 2009-10. The appeal was admitted by the High Court of Judicature at Madras on 10.06.2015. The dispute arose from the Tribunal's order which was challenged by the assessee. The High Court was informed that the assessee had been issued Form-3 under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, and consequently, sought permission to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the findings of the Tribunal are perverse on account of non-consideration of the plea of violation of principles of natural justice, particularly relating to cross-examination and not relying upon the relevant material placed? (Question of law/mixed fact and law, turning on principles of natural justice and evidence appreciation). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the Tribunal's findings were perverse due to the non-consideration of its plea regarding the violation of principles of natural justice, specifically concerning the right to cross-examination and the failure to rely on relevant material. The assessee relied on the substantial question of law framed at the time of admission of the appeal. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the Revenue on the substantial question of law. However, the Revenue was represented by its learned Senior Standing Counsel and Standing Counsel.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Tax Case Appeal No.240 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 23.04.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Tax Case Appeal No.240 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015 & C.M.P.No.7382 of 2019 M/s.Sri Vigneswara Foundry A-1095, Near Lakshmi Mills Co., Avinashi Road, P.N.Palayam, Coimbatore – 641 037.

... Appellant Vs.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-111, Coimbatore. ... Respondent

Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench, dated 26.09.2014 passed in I.T.A.No.1672/Mds/2014, Assessment Year 2009-10. For Appellant : Mr.N.S.Nandakumar For Respondent : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar

Senior Standing Counsel and Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani Standing Counsel Page 1/5 http://www.judis.nic.in Tax Case Appeal No.240 of 2015 J U D G M E N T (Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directed against the order dated 26.09.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.1672/Mds/2014 for the assessment year 2009-10. The above appeal was admitted on 10.06.2015 on the following Substantial Question of Law in the above appeal: "Whether the findings of the Tribunal is perverse on account of non-consideration of plea of violation of principles of natural justice, particularly relating to cross examination and not relying upon the relevant material placed?” 2. We have heard Mr.N.S.Nandakumar, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel and Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent/Revenue. Page 2/5 http://www.judis.nic.in Tax Case Appeal No.240 of 2015 3. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide the Substantial Question of Law framed for consideration on account of certain subsequent developments. The Government of India enacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) to provide for resolution of disputed tax and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act of the Parliament received the assent of the President on 17th March 2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17th March 2020. 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/ assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form-3 on 29.12.2020 and the learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the appeal. 5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. [M.D., J.] [K.R., J.] 23.04.2021 mkn (1/2) Page 3/5 http://www.judis.nic.in Tax Case Appeal No.240 of 2015 Index : Yes/No

Internet : Yes

To 1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-111, Coimbatore. Page 4/5 http://www.judis.nic.in Tax Case Appeal No.240 of 2015 M. DURAISWAMY, J. and KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. mkn Tax Case Appeal No.240 of 2015

23.04.2021 (1/2) Page 5/5 http://www.judis.nic.in

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →