SRI ABDUL BAQI HASAN ALI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

1 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 22.7.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.508 of 2019 Sri.Abdul Baqi Hasan Ali ...Appellant Vs The Income Tax Officer, Business Ward VI(2), Chennai-34. ...Respondent U APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 19.6.2017 made in ITA.No.1830/Mds/2013 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench for the assessment year 2010-11. For Appellant : Mr.A.S.Sriraman For Respondent: Mr.M.Swaminathan, SSC & Mrs.V.Pushpa, JSC & Mrs.S.Premalatha, JSC Judgment was delivered by

T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J

We have heard Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel, Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned Junior Standing Counsel and Mrs.S.Premalatha, Junior Standing Counsel http://www.judis.nic.in 2 accepting notice for the respondent. 2. This appeal, filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act), directed against the order dated 19.6.2017 made in ITA.No.1830/Mds/ 2013 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench for the assessment year 2010-11. 3. The assessee has filed this appeal by raising the following substantial questions of law : “i. Whether the interpretation of Section 54F of the Act by the Appellate Tribunal is correct so as to deny the tax exemption pertaining to the creation of the new asset used for residential service apartment ? ii. Whether the provisions of Section 54F of the Act would prohibit the claim of tax exemption pertaining to residential service apartment on the consideration of the residential purpose envisaged therein? iii. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in entertaining the additional grounds of appeal filed by the Revenue without following the procedure known to law in treating the sale of the original asset as two components namely building portion as short term capital asset and land portion as long term capital asset for the purpose of levying capital gains tax despite the treating of the original asset as long term capital asset by the respondent/ Assessing Officer in the assessment order? And http://www.judis.nic.in 3 iv. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in treating the income generated from the new asset as income from business despite the assessment of such income under the head 'income from house property' by the respondent/ Assessing Officer so as to consider the provisions of Section 54F(2) of the Act?” 4. The learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission to withdraw the appeal. He has also made an endorsement in the bundle today to that effect. 5. Hence, the above tax case appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. The substantial questions of law are left open. No costs. 22.7.2019 Internet: Yes RS http://www.judis.nic.in 4 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J RS To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench. 2.The Income Tax Officer, Business Ward VI(2), Chennai-34. TCA.No.508 of 2019 22.7.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in