PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF vs. V.BASKARAN

PDF · subscribers
TCA/463/2018HC Madras26 September 2019Bench: Hon`ble The ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue has become infructuous. The reasoning provided is that the Assessing Authority has already passed a fresh Assessment Order dated 31.03.2017, pursuant to the remand order of the ITAT dated 28.10.2016, which was the subject of the present appeal. Therefore, the purpose of the appeal, which was to challenge the ITAT's order, has been overtaken by subsequent events. The court did not delve into the merits of the original ITAT order or the subsequent assessment order. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as infructuous. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. The appeal challenged an order dated 28.10.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'D' Bench, Chennai. This ITAT order had apparently remanded the case back to the Assessing Authority. The assessment years involved are 1986-87 to 1996-97, concerning the assessee Thiru V. Baskaran. Subsequent to the ITAT's remand order, the Assessing Authority passed a fresh Assessment Order dated 31.03.2017.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is rendered infructuous due to subsequent events? (Question of law) The Revenue, through its learned Senior Standing Counsel, argued that the present appeal has become infructuous. This contention is based on the fact that the Assessing Authority has already passed an Assessment Order dated 31.03.2017 under Section 143(3) read with Section 158BC read with Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in compliance with the remand order of the ITAT dated 28.10.2016. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee's side.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 143(3),Section 158BC,Section 254

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Judgment dt. 26.09.2019 in TC(A) No.463 of 2018 Prl. CIT v.V.Baskaran IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 26.09.2019 CORAM : THE HON'BLE DR.VINEET KOTHARI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN Tax Case (Appeal) No.463 of 2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central 2, No.108, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. .. Appellant -vs- V.Baskaran .. Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai, dated 28.10.2016 made in I.T. (SS) A No.28/Mds/2009. __________ Page 1 of 4 http://www.judis.nic.in Judgment dt. 26.09.2019 in TC(A) No.463 of 2018 Prl. CIT v.V.Baskaran For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar Sr. Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani Jr. Standing Counsel JUDGMENT (Delivered by The Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice) The learned Senior Standing Counsel, Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, appearing for the appellant Revenue submits that in pursuance of the remand order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai, dated 28.10.2016, which is impugned in the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the learned Assessing Authority has already passed an Assessment Order dated 31.03.2017 under Section 143(3) read with Section 158BC read with Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Years 1986- 87 to 1996-97 in the case of the respondent Assessee Thiru V.Bhaskaran and therefore, the present appeal has become infructuous. __________ Page 2 of 4 http://www.judis.nic.in Judgment dt. 26.09.2019 in TC(A) No.463 of 2018 Prl. CIT v.V.Baskaran 2. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

(V.K.,ACJ.) (C.S.N.,J.) 26.09.2019 Index : Yes/No bbr

Note: Registry to communicate copy of this judgment to the respondent Assessee. To: 1. The Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench, Chennai. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. 3. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II(4), Chennai-34. __________ Page 3 of 4 http://www.judis.nic.in Judgment dt. 26.09.2019 in TC(A) No.463 of 2018 Prl. CIT v.V.Baskaran The Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice and C.Saravanan, J. bbr

T.C.(A) No.463 of 2018 26.09.2019 __________ Page 4 of 4 http://www.judis.nic.in

More judgments on Section 158BC

All 487 judgments and leading authorities on Section 158BC →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →