SAKTHI SUGARS LTD., vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.04.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018 and C.M.P.No.14515 of 2018 M/s.Sakthi Sugars Ltd., 180, Course Road, Coimbatore – 641 018.

... Appellant Vs.

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Range-1, Income Tax Office, Coimbatore. ... Respondent

Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench, dated 13.01.2017 passed in I.T.A.No.430/Mds/2015. For Appellant : Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan For Respondent : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar

Senior Standing Counsel Page 1/5 http://www.judis.nic.in Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018 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 13.01.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.430/Mds/2015 for the assessment year 2009-10. The appellant/assessee has raised the following Substantial Questions of Law in the above appeal. "1.Whether the order of the Tribunal refusing to remit the additional evidence in the form of Ledger accounts filed in support of claim of advances written off to the Assessing Officer/CIT (Appeals) for fresh consideration is perverse in law? 2.Whether the Triunal without considering the Ledger Copies filed, erred in coming to a wrong conclusion that in the absence of any evidence regarding the genuineness and purpose of advance/loans and confirmations from the borrowers or recipients of the amount refused to remit the matter to AO/CIT(A) for fresh consideration? Page 2/5 http://www.judis.nic.in Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018 3.Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amount spent towards Goodwill in the nature of advance given to farmers through Dhenkanal Water User's Society for improving the irrigation facilities to get adequate supply of sugarcane and written off as irrecoverable advances is not allowable deduction u/s.37 or as business loss u/s.28(i) of the Act?” 2. We have heard Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 3. 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 Page 3/5 http://www.judis.nic.in Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018 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 24.03.2021 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. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [M.D., J.] [R.H., J.] 20.04.2021

Index : Yes/No

Internet : Yes

mkn To 1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Range-1, Income Tax Office, Coimbatore. Page 4/5 http://www.judis.nic.in Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018 M. DURAISWAMY, J. and R. HEMALATHA, J. mkn Tax Case Appeal No.640 of 2018

20.04.2021 Page 5/5 http://www.judis.nic.in