Shri Ashok Giri vs. The Assistant Commissioner o

TCA/418/2022HC Madras04 January 2023Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice S. VAIDYANATHAN4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the substantial question of law raised by the assessee might not survive because the Tribunal had already remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for proper valuation. The Court clarified that the Tribunal's order of remand and the exercise directed to be carried out by the Assessing Officer were not confined to the property at Palavakkam but would apply to both the property at Palavakkam as well as the property situated at VGP Nagar. Therefore, the Tribunal's direction for proper valuation implicitly covered the VGP Nagar property, addressing the assessee's concern about non-adjudication. The Court disposed of the appeals with this clarification.

What were the facts?

These are two Tax Case Appeals filed by Shri Ashok Giri against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, dated 08.03.2022, in WTA No. 1/CHNY/2021 and WTA No. 2/CHNY/2021. The appeals challenge the Tribunal's decision concerning wealth tax assessments. The assessee is Shri Ashok Giri, and the respondent is the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Corporate Circle 3 (2), Chennai. The core of the dispute revolves around the valuation of properties, specifically mentioning land at VGP Nagar (Injambakkam Property) and another property at Palavakkam. The procedural history indicates that the Tribunal had remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for proper valuation.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law by not adjudicating the ground with respect to the land situated at VGP Nagar (Injambakkam Property) and thereby violating the Principles of Natural Justice? (Question of law and fact, turning on the Tribunal's procedure and adherence to natural justice principles). Assessee's Contention: The Tribunal failed to adjudicate the ground related to the VGP Nagar property, thus violating the principles of natural justice. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, addressed arguments based on the material available before the Court. The Court noted that the Tribunal had remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for proper valuation in terms of Rule 20 of Schedule III of Section 7(1) of the Wealth Tax Act. The revenue did not explicitly argue on the non-adjudication of the VGP Nagar property ground, but their counsel's submissions were considered by the Court in light of the remand order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 7(1), Rule 20 of Schedule III of the Wealth Tax Act

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1/4 T.C.A.Nos.418 and 419 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :: 04-01-2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.Nos.418 & 419 of 2022 Shri Ashok Giri ... Appellant in both appeals -vs- The Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Corporate Circle 3 (2), Chennai-600 034. ... Respondent in both appeals T.C.A.No.418 of 2022 is filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 08.03.2022, in W.T.A.No.1/CHNY/2021. T.C.A.No.419 of 2022 is filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 08.03.2022, in W.T.A.No.2/CHNY/2021. For Appellant in both appeals : Ms.A.Nivenditha For Respondent in both appeals : Mrs.V.Pushpa, Junior Standing Counsel. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/4 T.C.A.Nos.418 and 419 of 2022 JUDGMENT These Tax Case Appeals are filed, raising the following substantial question of law : Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law by not adjudicating the ground with respect to the land situated at VGP Nagar (Injambakkam Property) and thereby violating the Principles of Natural Justice ? 2. Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned Junior Standing Counsel, has taken notice for the respondent and addressed the arguments based on the material available before this Court. 3. The above question of law may not even survive in view of the fact that the Tribunal has remanded the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer i.e., the Wealth Tax Officer, for making proper valuation in terms of Rule 20 of Schedule III of Section 7 (1) of the Wealth Tax Act. There is nothing in the order of the Tribunal, which would indicate that the above direction was confined to the property at Palavakkam and not to the property situated at VGP Nagar. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/4 T.C.A.Nos.418 and 419 of 2022 4. For the purpose of clarification, we say that the order of remand and the exercise, which the Tribunal has directed the Assessing Officer to carry out, would be with reference to both the properties at Palavakkam as well as VGP Nagar.

These Tax Case Appeals are disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected C.M.P.Nos.23194,23197 and 23204 of 2022 are closed. Index : Yes/No

(S.V.N.,J.) (M.S.Q.,J.) Internet : Yes/No 04-01-2023 Speaking / Non-speaking Order dixit To The Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Corporate Circle 3 (2), Chennai-600 034. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/4 T.C.A.Nos.418 and 419 of 2022 S.VAIDYANATHAN,J. AND MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ,J.

dixit/ssn T.C.A.Nos.418 & 419/2022 04-01-2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →