SMT.JANAKI MOHAN vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF

PDF · subscribers
TCA/71/2016HC Madras31 March 2021Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DURAISWAMY5 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the substantial questions of law framed for consideration. The Court noted that the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, was enacted to provide for the resolution of disputed tax. The learned counsel for the appellant informed the Court that the assessee had been issued Form-3 under this Act and sought permission to withdraw the appeal. In view of this submission, the Tax Case Appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. No costs were awarded. The specific findings or reasoning of the ITAT on Section 54F or the definition of "appurtenant" land were not discussed or adjudicated by the High Court.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Janaki Mohan, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 04.11.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Madras "C" Bench, for the assessment year 2009-10. The appeal was admitted on substantial questions of law concerning the denial of the benefit of Section 54F of the Act and whether 5.61 acres of land constituted land "appurtenant" to a residential house purchased by the assessee. The High Court heard arguments from both the assessee and the Revenue. However, due to subsequent developments, specifically the enactment of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, the appeal was not decided on its merits.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in denying the benefit of Section 54F of the Act to the appellant? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the land comprised in 5.61 acres would not constitute land "appurtenant" to the residential house purchased by the appellant? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the ITAT erred in denying the benefit of Section 54F and in its interpretation of "appurtenant" land. The assessee sought to withdraw the appeal due to the enactment of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, having been issued Form-3 under the Act. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the Revenue on the substantial questions of law. The Revenue was represented by its Senior Standing Counsel.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 54F

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Tax Case Appeal No.71 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 31.03.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI Tax Case Appeal No.71 of 2016 Janaki Mohan ... Appellant Vs.

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Business Circle – III, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondent

Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench, dated 04.11.2015 passed in I.T.A.No.1837/Mds/2012. For Appellant : Ms.Sriniranjani Srinivasan For Respondent : Mr.J.Narayanasamy, Senior Standing Counsel Page 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Tax Case Appeal No.71 of 2016 J U D G M E N T (Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) The appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), are directed against the order dated 04.11.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.1837/Mds/2012 for the assessment year 2009-10. 2.The above appeal was admitted on the following Substantial Questions of Law: “1)Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in denying the benefit of S.54F of the Act to the appellant? 2)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that the land comprised in 5.61 acres would not constitute land “appurtenant” to the residential house purchased by the appellant herein?” Page 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Tax Case Appeal No.71 of 2016 3.We have heard Ms.Sriniranjani Srinivasan, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and Mr.J.Narayanasamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 4.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 17th March 2020. 5.We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/ assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form – 3 on 17.12.2020 and the learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the appeal. Page 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Tax Case Appeal No.71 of 2016 6.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.] [T.V.T.S., J.] Index : Yes/No 31.03.2021

Internet : Yes

va To 1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Business Circle – III, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. Page 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Tax Case Appeal No.71 of 2016 M. DURAISWAMY, J. and T.V. THAMILSELVI, J. va Tax Case Appeal No.71 of 2016\

31.03.2021 Page 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

More judgments on Section 54F

All 2,628 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54F →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →