SHRI RAMU SUBBIAH vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

PDF · subscribers
TCA/620/2017HC Madras30 April 2021Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DURAISWAMY5 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the substantial question of law framed for consideration. This was due to subsequent developments, specifically the enactment of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Court was informed that the assessee had been issued Form-3 under this Act, indicating a resolution of the disputed tax. Consequently, the learned counsel for the appellant/assessee sought permission to withdraw the appeal. In view of this submission, the High Court dismissed the Tax Case Appeal as withdrawn. No costs were awarded. The specific findings of the ITAT or the High Court on the merits of the exemption claim are not discussed as the appeal was withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shri Ramu Subbiah, filed an appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Madras against an order dated 23.09.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Madras "C" Bench. The appeal pertained to assessment year 2011-12. The High Court admitted the appeal on 08.12.2017, framing a substantial question of law. During the pendency of the appeal, the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 was enacted. The assessee informed the Court that they had been issued Form-3 under this Act and sought permission to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in rejecting the claim for tax exemption on the surplus generated from the sale of agricultural lands on the misconstruction of the provisions of Section 2(14) of the Act as well as on the recording of perverse factual findings in relation thereto? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the ITAT had misconstrued Section 2(14) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and made perverse factual findings in rejecting the claim for tax exemption on the surplus from the sale of agricultural lands. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the Revenue on this issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 2(14)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Tax Case Appeal No.620 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 30.04.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA Tax Case Appeal No.620 of 2017 Shri Ramu Subbiah C/o.Shri S.Sridhar Shri A.S.Sriraman, Advocates, New No.14, Old No.82, Flat No.5, 1st Avenue, Indira Nagar, Chennai – 600 020.

... Appellant Vs.

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle-12, Chennai. ... Respondent

Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench, dated 23.09.2016 passed in I.T.A.No.2058/Mds/2016. For Appellant : Mr.M.Kaushik for Mr.S.Sridhar For Respondent : Mrs.V.Pushpa

Standing Counsel Page 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Tax Case Appeal No.620 of 2017 J U D G M E N T (Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directed against the order dated 23.09.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.2058/Mds/2016 for the assessment year 2011-12. The above appeal has been admitted on 08.12.2017 on the following Substantial Question of Law: "Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in rejecting the claim for tax exemption on the surplus generated from the sale of agricultural lands on the misconstruction of the provisions of Section 2(14) of the Act as well as on the recording of perverse factual findings in relation thereto?” 2. We have heard Mr.M.Kaushik for Mr.S.Sridhar, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 3. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide the Substantial Page 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Tax Case Appeal No.620 of 2017 Question 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. 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/ assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form-3 on 22.04.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the appeal. 5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. [M.D., J.] [R.H., J.] 30.04.2021 mkn

Index : Yes/No

Page 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Tax Case Appeal No.620 of 2017 Internet : Yes

To 1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle-12, Chennai. Page 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Tax Case Appeal No.620 of 2017 M. DURAISWAMY, J. and R. HEMALATHA, J. mkn Tax Case Appeal No.620 of 2017

30.04.2021 Page 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

More judgments on Section 2(14)

All 1,130 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(14) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →