M/S.KEESARA PLASTICS PVT.LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

PDF · subscribers
TCA/493/2017HC Madras15 July 2020Bench: THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeals. The reasoning was based on the assessee's submission that they had availed the benefit of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020, and the revenue had no objection. Consequently, the Tax Case Appeals were dismissed as withdrawn. No costs were awarded. The specific findings of the ITAT or the underlying merits of the appeals were not considered or decided by the High Court as the appeals were disposed of on a procedural ground. No issues were left undecided as the appeals were withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Keesara Plastics Pvt. Ltd., filed two Tax Case Appeals (TCA Nos. 493 & 494 of 2017) before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. These appeals were filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Madras 'B' Bench, dated May 12, 2017, which had decided the appeals in ITA Nos. 2208/Mds/2015 and 2209/Mds/2015. The appeals challenged the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle -II(4), Chennai. The specific assessment years and the amounts in dispute are not recorded in this order. The procedural history leading to the ITAT order is not detailed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee is permitted to withdraw the appeals before the High Court? (Question of procedure turning on the assessee's eligibility for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020). Assessee's Contention: The learned counsel for the Appellant/Assessee submitted that since the Appellant has availed the benefit of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020, the Appellant may be permitted to withdraw the Appeals. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondent/Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal of the appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras ‘B’

Order dt 15.7.2020 in TCA 493 & 494/2017 Keesara Plastics Pvt Ltd v. DCIT 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15.7.2020 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY T.C.A.Nos.493 & 494 of 2017 M/s.Keesara Plastics Pvt. Ltd., L-3, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Kodungaiyur, Chennai 118. Appellant vs TheDeputy CommissionerofIncomeTax, Company Circle -II(4), Chennai-34. Respondent Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras ‘B’ Bench dated 12.5.2017 in I.T.A.Nos.2208/Mds/2015 and 2209/Mds/2015. For Appellant : Mr.P.J.Sri Ganesh for Mr.P.J.Rishikesh For Respondent : Mr.Rajesh, Junior Standing Counsel for Mr.Karthik Ranganathan SeniorStandingCounsel COMMON 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 residences and the counsel, staff of the Court appearing from their respective residences. http://www.judis.nic.in Order dt 15.7.2020 in TCA 493 & 494/2017 Keesara Plastics Pvt Ltd v. DCIT 2 2. The learned counsel for the Appellant submits that since the Appellant/Assessee has availed the benefit of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020, the Appellant may be permitted to withdraw the Appeals. 3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondent/Revenue has no objection for the same. 4. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeals are dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. (V.K.J.) (K.R.,J.) 15.7.2020 (1/2) ssk. Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Dr.VINEET KOTHARI, J. and KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. ssk. T.C.A.Nos.493 & 494 of 2017 http://www.judis.nic.in Order dt 15.7.2020 in TCA 493 & 494/2017 Keesara Plastics Pvt Ltd v. DCIT 3 15.7.2020 (1/2) http://www.judis.nic.in

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →