M.JAGANATHAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER

TCA/363/2017HC Madras20 July 2020Bench: THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted the submission by the assessee's counsel that the appeal had become infructuous due to the subsequent order passed by the Assessing Authority, which granted relief to the assessee following a remand by the ITAT. The revenue's counsel did not object to this submission. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal to be withdrawn. The operative direction was that the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn, with no costs awarded. No specific issue was left undecided; the entire appeal was disposed of based on the assessee's request for withdrawal.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M. Jaganathan, filed a Tax Case Appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Madras against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Madras C Bench, dated 17.06.2016. The appeal was filed against the ITAT's order. The procedural history indicates that the ITAT had remanded the matter to the Assessing Authority. Subsequently, the Assessing Authority passed an order and granted relief to the assessee. The appeal before the High Court was heard by a bench comprising Dr. Justice Vineet Kothari and Mr. Justice Krishnan Ramasamy.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tax Case Appeal filed by the assessee has become infructuous, thereby warranting withdrawal. (Question of fact) Assessee's contention: The assessee's counsel submitted that the appeal has become infructuous because the Assessing Authority, pursuant to the remand by the Tribunal, has passed an order and granted relief to the assessee. Therefore, the assessee sought permission to withdraw the appeal. Revenue's contention: The revenue's counsel had no objection to the withdrawal of the present appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Order dt.20.07.2020 TCA No.363 OF 2017 1/2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20.07.2020 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY TCA No.363 OF 2017 M.Jaganathan ... Appellant vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 3, Coimbatore ... Respondent Prayer ::- Tax Case Appeal filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras C Bench, in ITA No.394/Mds/2016 dated 17.06.2016. For appellant : Mr.N.V.Balaji For respondent : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar ORDER (Made by DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J.) The Court was held by Video Conference, as per the Resolution of the Full Court dated 3 July 2020, by Judges at their respective residence and the counsel, staff of the Court appearing from their respective residences. http://www.judis.nic.in Order dt.20.07.2020 TCA No.363 OF 2017 2/2 DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J. and

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. (tar) 2. The learned counsel for the assessee, Mr.N.V.Balaji, submits that the appeal has become infructuous and therefore, he may be allowed to withdraw the appeal, as upon the remand by the Tribunal, the Assessing Authority has passed the order and granted relief to the assessee. 3. The learned counsel for the revenue, Mr.T.R. Senthil Kumar has no objection for withdrawal of the present appeal. 4. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.. (V.K.,J.) (K.R.,J.) 20.07.2020

kpl/tar To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras C Bench TCA No.363 OF 2017 http://www.judis.nic.in

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →