M/S.TAMILNADU CIVIL SUPPLIES vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIOER OF
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted that it was not necessary to decide the substantial questions of law due to subsequent developments, specifically the enactment of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Court observed that the assessee intended to avail the benefit of this scheme. The Court directed the assessee to file Form No.I under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, and the competent authority was directed to process the application expeditiously, preferably within six weeks from the date of filing. The Tax Case Appeal was disposed of with the liberty granted to the assessee to restore the appeal if the decision on the declaration filed under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act was not in their favour. The substantial questions of law were left open. No costs were awarded.
What were the facts?
The assessee, M/s Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., filed a Tax Case Appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Madras, challenging an order dated 28.02.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai ('the Tribunal') in I.T.A.No.2862/Chny/2018. The appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Revenue is represented by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle -3(1). The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. During the proceedings, the assessee's counsel informed the court that the assessee intended to avail the benefit of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and was taking steps to file the necessary declaration.
What were the issues?
The Tribunal had to decide the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the provisions of Section 43B(f) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are constitutionally valid, considering the lack of reasons for their insertion to overcome the law declared by the Apex Court in M/s Bharath Earth Movers Ltd.? 2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in not following the decision of the Calcutta High Court on the validity of Section 43B(f), despite interim orders from the Apex Court? 3. Whether the assessee's claim for deduction of the provision for leave encashment in the computation of taxable total income is proper and justified? Assessee's contentions: The assessee intended to avail the benefit of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and was taking steps to file the application/declaration. Revenue's contentions: No specific contentions are recorded for the Revenue in relation to the substantial questions of law, as the matter was disposed of due to the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
T.C.A.No.465 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 18.12.2020 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN T.C.A.No.465 of 2020
M/s Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., No.12, Thambusamy Road, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010 .. Appellant Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle -3(1) New Block, 4th Floor, No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai - 600 034 .. Respondent Prayer:- Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 28.02.2019 made in I.T.A.No.2862/Chny/2018 relating to the Assessment Year 2015-2016. For Appellant : Mr.A.S.Sriraman For Respondent : Ms.V.Pushpa for Mr.M.Swaminathan Senior Standing counsel 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.465 of 2020 J U D G M E N T [Judgment of the Court was made by
T.S.SIVAGNANAM
, J.]
This appeal has been filed by the assessee under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), challenging the order dated 28.02.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, 'B' Bench ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.2862/Chny/2018 for the Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. The following Substantial Questions of Law were raised for consideration: "1. Whether the provisions of section 43B(f) of the act is constitutionally valid in view of lack of reasons shown for inserting the said provisions in the statute to overcome the law declared by the Apex Court in the case of M/s Bharath Earth Movers Ltd? 2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in not following the only decision available on the validity of the provisions in section 43B(f) of the Act rendered by the Calcutta High Court despite the interim orders passed by the Apex Court in relation thereto? 3. Whether the claim for deduction of the provision for leave encashment made in the computation of taxable total income by the Appellant is proper and justified? 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.465 of 2020 2. We have heard Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and Ms.V.Pushpa, learned counsel for Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant / assessee, on instructions, submitted that the appellant / assessee intends to avail the benefit of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme ('VVS Scheme' for brevity) and in this regard, the assessee is taking steps to file the application / declaration in Form No.I. 4. 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. 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.465 of 2020 5. 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 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. 6. 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 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.465 of 2020 the Act and the particulars to 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. 7. As observed, the assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration to be 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 appeal 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. In the light of the above, We direct the appellant / assessee to file the Form No.I and the competent authority shall process the application / declaration in accordance with the Act and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six (6) weeks from the date on which the declaration is filed in the proper form. 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.465 of 2020 9. With this direction, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and Consequently, the Substantial Questions of Law are left open. No costs. (T.S.S.,J) (V.B.S.,J) 18.12.2020 Index: Yes / No Internet: Yes / No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.465 of 2020 T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J. ssd To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai. T.C.A.No.465 of 2020 18.12.2020 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
More judgments on Section 43B
- Vco Consulatatns and Sevices Private… vs ITO, Corporate Ward 3(3), ChennaiITA 2145/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Siemens Gamesa Renewable Power Private… vs The Dy CIT Circle 8(2)(1), MumbaiITA 8020/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Amritvarsha Industries Limited, Ambedkar… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 6481/DEL/2026[2010-2011]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2010-2011
- Karaj Singh, Haryana vs PCIT (Central) Gurgaon, GurgaonITA 642/CHANDI/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- ACIT, Mumbai vs Imp Powers Limited, MumbaiITA 4982/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026