M/S.HARIDAS HUF vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
TCA/450/2020HC Madras05 January 2021Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice T. S. SIVAGNANAM6 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the assessee had filed a declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. Consequently, the Court directed the Competent Authority to process the application under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, and pass appropriate orders expeditiously. The assessee was granted liberty to restore the appeal if the decision on their declaration was not in their favour. In such an event, the Registry was directed to entertain the restoration petition without insisting on a condonation of delay application. The substantial questions of law were left open, and the tax case appeal was disposed of with the aforementioned liberty. No costs were awarded.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s.Haridas HUF, filed an appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Madras against an order dated 29.11.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Madras 'C' Bench. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2015-16. The ITAT's order was challenged concerning the denial of deduction on a part of the land purchased by the appellant and the subsequent remittance of the issue back to the assessing officer for re-examination under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee also questioned the Tribunal's finding that a specific plot was vacant and not integral to the enjoyment of the property.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in upholding the denial of deduction on a portion of the land purchased by the appellant, as per Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 2. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in remitting the case back to the assessing officer to re-examine the eligibility for deduction under Section 54 of the Act? 3. Whether the finding of the Tribunal that Plot No. 31 is vacant, not an indivisible part of the building on Plot No. 32, and not necessary for the enjoyment of the property, was perverse? Assessee's Contention: The assessee had filed a declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme on 31.12.2020 and was awaiting orders. Revenue's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 54

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

TCA.No.450 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 05.01.2021 CORAM : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA Tax Case Appeal No.450 of 2020 M/s.Haridas HUF, No.11, Radha Krishnan Street, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600017. ...Appellant Vs Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward-1(3), 121, Mahatma Gandhi Salai, Chennai - 600034. ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 29.11.2019 made in ITA.No.1570/Chny/2019 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench for the assessment year 2015-16. For Appellant: Mr.N.V.Balaji For Respondent: Mrs.R.Hemalatha Senior Standing Counsel 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.450 of 2020 JUDGMENT (Delivered by

T.S.Sivagnanam,J

) This appeal has been filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) challenging the order dated 29.11.2019 made in ITA.No.1570/Chny/2019 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench ('the Tribunal' for brevity) for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: “1. Whether Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in upholding the order of lower authorities denying deduction in respect of part of the land purchased by the appellant? 2. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in remitting the case back to the file of the assessing officer, requiring him to examine afresh, on the issue whether the appellant was eligible for deduction under section 54 of the Act? 3.Is the finding of the Tribunal that Plot 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.450 of 2020 No.31 is presently vacant and cannot be considered as indivisible part of the building constructed in plot 32, nor it is necessary for the enjoyment of the property, not perverse?" 3. We have heard Mr.N.V.Balaji, learned counsel for the appellant and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent/Revenue. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/assessee submits that the appellant/assessee has already filed the declaration/undertaking under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme on 31.12.2020 and is awaiting orders to be passed in Form No.3. 5. In the light of the subsequent event, the Competent Authority shall process the application/declaration in accordance with the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible. The assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.450 of 2020 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 appeal and on such request made by the assessee by filing a miscellaneous petition for restoration, the Registry shall place such petition before the appropriate Division Bench for orders. 6. The tax case appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and consequently, the substantial questions of law framed are left open. No costs. (T.S.S.,J.) (R.N.M.,J.) 05.01.2021 Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking Judgment/Non speaking Judgment hvk 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.450 of 2020 To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench. 2. Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward-1(3), 121, Mahatma Gandhi Salai, Chennai - 600034. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.450 of 2020 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND R.N.MANJULA,J hvk TCA.No.450 of 2020 05.01.2021 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

More judgments on Section 54

All 1,745 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →