M/S.TVH ENERGY RESOURCES PVT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF I

PDF · subscribers
TCA/567/2021HC Madras20 December 2021Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice R. MAHADEVAN4 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the substantial questions of law on merits. The learned counsel for the appellant/assessee filed a memo stating that the assessee had availed the benefit of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, and paid a portion of the tax, rendering nothing further for adjudication. Consequently, the assessee sought permission to withdraw the appeal. The High Court, in view of the submissions, dismissed the tax appeal as withdrawn. No costs were awarded. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. TVH Energy Resources Private Limited, filed a Tax Case Appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Madras, challenging an order dated 03.11.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2011-12. The appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The core of the dispute involved the admissibility of certain documents and statements used by the Assessing Officer to raise a demand, and the powers of the Tribunal. During the pendency of the appeal, the assessee availed the benefit of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, and paid a portion of the tax.

What were the issues?

The High Court was to decide the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the Assessing Officer was right in relying upon a document which is inadmissible in evidence? 2. Whether a sworn statement not subjected to cross-examination is admissible when its authenticity and contents are not proved in accordance with law? 3. Whether a sheet of paper, not being books of accounts, lacking signatures, and not tallying with the assessee's accounts, is admissible in law without the department discharging the initial burden of proof for presumption? 4. Whether repeatedly driving parties back to the Assessing Officer by the Appellate Tribunal constitutes a failure to exercise the power conferred on the tribunal? 5. Whether the mere recovery of a scrap of paper during survey proceedings under Section 133A empowers the Assessing Officer to raise a demand? The Assessee contended that the documents and statements relied upon by the Assessing Officer were inadmissible. The Revenue's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 133A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Tax Case Appeal No.567 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.12.2021 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Tax Case Appeal No.567 of 2021 and CMP.No.20244 of 2021 M/s.TVH Energy Resources Private Limited, Represented by its Director, No.16/17, 3rd Cross Street, TVH Novella, R.A.Puram, Chennai - 600 028.

... Appellant -Vs- The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai Circle I (2), No.46, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. ... Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 03.11.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai in ITA No.2484/MDS/2017. 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tax Case Appeal No.567 of 2021 For Appellant : Mr.R.K. Sachindhar for M/S.Richardson Wilson For Respondent : Mr. J. Narayansamy J U D G M E N T (Judgment was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.) This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Assessee, calling in question the correctness of the order dated 30.11.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.2484/Mds/2017, relating to the assessment year 2011-12, by raising the following substantial questions of law:- (i) Whether the Assessing Officer is right in relying upon a document which is inadmissible in evidence? (ii) Whether a sworn statement which is not subjected to cross examination be admissible when its authenticity and contents is not proved in a manner known to law? (iii) Whether a sheet of paper which is not books of accounts, having no signature and does not tally with the accounts of the assessee be admissible in law without discharging the initial burden of proof for presumption by the department? 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tax Case Appeal No.567 of 2021 (iv) Whether driving the parties again and again to Assessing Officer by the Appellate Tribunal is failure to exercise of power conferred on the tribunal? (v) Whether a mere recovery of scrap of paper in survey proceedings under Section 133A will empower the Assessing Officer to raise a demand? 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo dated 20.12.2021, wherein, it is stated that the appellant / assessee has already availed the benefit conferred under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and paid a portion of the tax and hence, nothing survives for adjudication herein. Stating so, the learned counsel sought permission of this court to withdraw this appeal. He has also filed a memo dated 20.12.2021 to that effect. 3. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant / assessee, this tax appeal case is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [R.M.D,J.] [M.S.Q, J.] 20.12.2021 AT

Internet : Yes

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tax Case Appeal No.567 of 2021 Index : Yes / No R. MAHADEVAN, J. AND MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. AT To 1.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai Circle I (2), No.46, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. 2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “A” Bench. Tax Case Appeal No.567 of 2021 and CMP.No.20244 of 2021 20.12.2021 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

More judgments on Section 133A

All 5,893 judgments and leading authorities on Section 133A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →