K.SRIKANTH vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF

PDF · subscribers
TCA/246/2020HC Madras16 December 2020Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice T. S. SIVAGNANAM8 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that it was not necessary to decide the substantial questions of law framed for consideration due to subsequent developments, specifically the enactment of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Court was informed that the assessee had filed declarations under this Act. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the appeals pending. The Tax Case Appeals were disposed of on the ground that the assessee had availed the benefit under the Act. The Department was directed to process the application at the earliest and communicate the decision to the assessee. The assessee was granted liberty to restore the appeals in the event the decision on the declarations was not in their favour. The substantial questions of law were left open. No costs were awarded.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shri K. Srikanth, filed Tax Case Appeals before the High Court of Judicature at Madras, challenging a common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai, dated May 19, 2020. These appeals pertained to Assessment Year 2001-2002. The appeals were admitted on August 31, 2020, on substantial questions of law. During the pendency of these appeals, the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, was enacted. The assessee informed the court that declarations had been filed under this Act on November 23, 2020. Consequently, the High Court deemed it unnecessary to decide the substantial questions of law.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was valid. 2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax was justified in invoking powers under Section 263 of the Act and if the twin conditions were concurrently complied with. 3. Whether payment towards a bank liability under an OTS settlement scheme constituted diversion of income by overriding title, as against the application of income for sale within the scope of Section 48. 4. Whether payment of bank liability under an OTS scheme constituted expenses incurred in connection with the transfer for removing encumbrance on the transferred asset, within the scope of Section 48. Assessee's Contentions: The judgment does not record specific contentions made by the assessee on these issues. However, the filing of the appeals indicates a challenge to the Tribunal's order on these points. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record specific contentions made by the revenue on these issues.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 147,Section 263,Section 48

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (3 matters)

I.T.A.No.307/Chny/2010
I.T.A.No.1015/Chny/2012
I.T.A.No.1016/Chny/2012

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

T.C.A.Nos.246 to 248 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 16.12.2020 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN T.C.A.Nos.246 to 248 of 2020

Shri K.Srikanth ... Appellant Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle - II(4) Chennai. ... Respondent Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai, dated 19.05.2020 made in I.T.A.No.307/Chny/2010, I.T.A.No.1015/Chny/2012 and I.T.A.No.1016/Chny/2012, relating to the Assessment Year 2001 - 2002. For Appellant : Mr.A.S.Sriraman For Respondent : Ms.R.Hemalatha Senior Standing Counsel

1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.Nos.246 to 248 of 2020 JUDGMENT [Order of the Court was made by

T.S.SIVAGNANAM

, J.]

These appeals have been filed by the Assessee under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), challenging the common order dated 19.05.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.307/Chny/2010, I.T.A.No.1015/Chny/2012 and I.T.A.No.1016/Chny/2012 for the Assessment Year 2001 - 2002. The appeals were admitted on 31.08.2020 on the following Substantial Questions of Law : “1. Whether the reopening of the assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is valid in law? 2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax was justified in invoking the power under Section 263 of the Act and the twin conditions prescribed have been complied with concurrently? 3. Whether the payment towards the bank liability under OTS settlement scheme would amount to diversion of income by overriding title as against the application of income for such sale within the scope of Section 48 of the Act? 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.Nos.246 to 248 of 2020 4. Whether the payment of bank liability under OTS scheme would constitute alternatively as expenses incurred in connection with the transfer for removing the encumbrance on the transferred asset within the scope of Section 48 of the Act?” 2. We have heard Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/assessee and Ms.R.Hemalatha, Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent/revenue. 3. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide the Substantial Questions 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.

In terms of the said Act, the assessee has been given an option to put an end to the tax disputes, which may be pending at different levels 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.Nos.246 to 248 of 2020 either before the First Appellate Authority or before the Tribunal or before the High Court or before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Under Section 2(j) “disputed tax” has been defined. In terms of Section 3, where a declarant means a person, who files a declaration under Section 4 on or before the last date files a declaration to the designated authority in accordance with the provisions of Section 4 in respect of tax arrears, then, notwithstanding anything contained in the Income Tax Act or any other law for the time being in force, the amount payable by the declarant shall be determined in terms of Section 3(a-c) thereunder. 5. The First Proviso to Section 3 states that in case, where an Appeal or Writ Petition or Special Leave Petition is filed by the Income Tax authority on any issue before the Appellate Forum, the amount payable shall be one-half of the amount in the table stipulated in Section 3 calculated on such issue, in such a manner as may be prescribed. The second proviso deals with the cases, where the matter is before the Commissioner (Appeals) or before the Dispute Resolution Panel. The third proviso deals with cases, where the issue is pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The filing of the declaration is as per Section 4 of the Act and the particulars to 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.Nos.246 to 248 of 2020 be furnished are also mentioned in the Sub Sections of Section 4. Section 5 of the Act deals with the time and manner of the payment and Section 6 deals with Immunity from initiation of proceedings in respect of offence and imposition of penalty in certain cases. Section 9 of the Act deals with cases, where the Act 3 of 2020 will not be applicable. 6. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/assessee that the assessee has already filed the declarations under Section 4 of the Act on 23.11.2020. 7. In the light of the fact that the assessee has already availed the benefit under the Act, no useful purpose would be served in keeping these appeals pending. At the same time, safeguarding the interest of the assessee in the event the order to be passed by the Department under the Act is not in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeals stand disposed of on the ground that the assessee has already filed a declaration and the Department shall process the application at the earliest in accordance with the said Act and communicate the decision to the assessee at the earliest. As observed, the assessee is given liberty to restore these appeals in the event 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.Nos.246 to 248 of 2020 the ultimate decision to be taken on the declarations 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 application to be filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appeals and on such request made by the assessee by filing a Miscellaneous Petition for Restoration, the Registry shall place such petition before the Division Bench for orders. 8. With this observation, the Tax Case Appeals stand disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and Consequently, the Substantial Questions of Law are left open. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

(T.S.S.,J) (V.B.S.,J) 16.12.2020 Ssd Index: Yes / No Internet: Yes / No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai. 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.Nos.246 to 248 of 2020 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.Nos.246 to 248 of 2020 T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J. Ssd T.C.A.Nos.246 to 248 of 2020 16.12.2020 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →