M/S.ASHOK MAKWANA(HUF) vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
TCA/79/2020HC Madras27 November 2020Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice T. S. SIVAGNANAM8 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that it was not necessary to decide the substantial questions of law due to subsequent developments. The Government of India enacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, providing an option for assessees to resolve tax disputes. The assessee informed the court that they had filed a declaration under Section 4 of this Act on 15.09.2020. Consequently, the court found no useful purpose in keeping the appeals pending. The Tax Case Appeals were disposed of on the ground that the assessee had availed the benefit under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act. The court granted liberty to the assessee to restore these appeals if the decision on their declaration under the Act was not in their favour. The substantial questions of law were left open.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Ashok Makwana (HUF), filed two Tax Case Appeals (T.C.A. Nos. 79 & 80 of 2020) before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. These appeals challenged orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 16.08.2019, pertaining to Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2012-13. The appeals were admitted on substantial questions of law. The core dispute involved the genuineness of share transactions, the claim of exemption under Section 10(38) for long-term capital gains, and additions made under Section 68. The appeals were listed for hearing before the High Court. Subsequently, the assessee informed the court that they had filed a declaration under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT was correct in treating share purchase and sale transactions as bogus, despite the appellant providing documentary evidence of sale proceeds received directly from their broker, including contract notes showing various transaction charges, and bank credits on settlement dates? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 10(38) and Section 68). 2. Whether the ITAT was correct in disallowing the claim under Section 10(38) based on an investigation wing report about bogus capital gains, without a finding that the appellant was investigated or part of an arrangement to generate bogus gains? (Question of law, concerning Section 10(38)). 3. Whether the ITAT was correct in sustaining additions under Section 68 when the appellant had satisfied all ingredients of the section, including identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the transaction? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 68). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that documentary evidence, including bank credits and contract notes detailing transaction charges, proved the genuineness of share transactions and the receipt of sale proceeds. They also contended that the disallowance under Section 10(38) was based on a general investigation report without specific findings against them, and that they had met the conditions of Section 68. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record specific contentions made by the Revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 10(38),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

T.C.A.Nos.79 & 80 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 27.11.2020 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN T.C.A.Nos.79 & 80 of 2020 M/s.Ashok Makwana (HUF) Flat No.E062, Door No.49, DLF Commanders Court, Ethiraj Salai, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008 .. Appellant in both T.C.As Versus Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward-9(1) Chennai. .. Respondent in both T.C.As Common Prayer:- Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai made in I.T.A.No.747/Chny/2019 and I.T.A.No.746/Chny/2019 dated 16.08.2019 relating to the Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2012-13 respectively. 1/8 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.79 & 80 of 2020 For Appellant : Mr.Ashok Pathy For M/s.Pass Associates [in both T.C.As]

For Respondent : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan Senior Standing counsel [in both T.C.As] COMMON JUDGMENT [Order of the Court was made by

T.S.SIVAGNANAM

, J.]

These appeals have been filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directed against the order dated 16.08.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.747/Chny/2019 and I.T.A.No.746/Chny/2019 for the Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2012-13 respectively. These appeals were admitted on 17.02.2020 on the following Substantial Questions of Law: “1.Whether the Income Tax Appellate is right in law in treating the transaction of purchase and sale of shares are bogus in nature when the appellant has provided documentary evidences to prove that the appellant received sale proceeds of shares directly from their broker M/s.Sugal and Damani Share Brokers Ltd., by credit to his Bank a/c. as on date of settlement and that the sale transaction of shares are covered by contract 2/8 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.79 & 80 of 2020 note evidencing that the transactions have suffered expenses like brokerage, service tax, STT, stamp duty, exchange and SEBI turnover charges, etc., which are specifically shown in the contract note issued by the Broker? 2. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in disallowing the claim of the appellant under Section 10(38) on the basis of the report of the investigation wing prepared with respect to bogus capital gains and where there is no finding by the revenue authorities that the appellant has been investigated or that the appellant has been a part of any arrangement for purpose of generating bogus long term capital gain to disallow the claim of appellant the appellant under Section 10(38) of IT Act? 3.Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in sustaining the addition made by the assessing officer under Section 68 despite the fact that the appellant had satisfied all the ingredients of section 68 such as identity of the party, genuiness of the transaction and creditworthiness of the transaction?” 2. We have heard Mr.Ashok Pathy for M/s.Pass Associates, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 3/8 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.79 & 80 of 2020 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 17th March 2020.

4.

In terms of the said Act, the assessee has been given an option to put an end to the tax disputes, which may be pending at different levels either before the First Appellate Authority or before the Tribunal or before the High Court or before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Under Section 2(j) “disputed tax” has been defined. In terms of Section 3, where a declarant means a person, who files a declaration under Section 4 on or before the last date files a declaration to the designated authority in accordance with the provisions of Section 4 in respect of tax arrears, then, notwithstanding anything contained in the Income Tax Act or any other law 4/8 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.79 & 80 of 2020 for the time being in force, the amount payable by the declarant shall be determined in terms of Section 3(a-c) thereunder. 5. The First Proviso to Section 3 states that in case, where an Appeal or Writ Petition or Special Leave Petition is filed by the Income Tax authority on any issue before the Appellate Forum, the amount payable shall be one-half of the amount in the table stipulated in Section 3 calculated on such issue, in such a manner as may be prescribed. The second proviso deals with the cases, where the matter is before the Commissioner (Appeals) or before the Dispute Resolution Panel. The third proviso deals with cases, where the issue is pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The filing of the declaration is as per Section 4 of the Act and the particulars to be furnished are also mentioned in the Sub Sections of Section 4. Section 5 of the Act deals with the time and manner of the payment and Section 6 deals with Immunity from initiation of proceedings in respect of offence and imposition of penalty in certain cases. Section 9 of the Act deals with cases, where the Act 3 of 2020 will not be applicable. 5/8 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.79 & 80 of 2020 6. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/assessee that the assessee has already filed the declaration under Section 4 of the Act on 15.09.2020. 7. In the light of the fact that the assessee has already availed the benefit under the Act, no useful purpose would be served in keeping these appeals pending. At the same time, safeguarding the interest of the assessee in the event the order to be passed by the Department under the Act is not in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeals stand disposed of on the ground that the assessee has already filed a declaration and the Department shall process the application at the earliest in accordance with the said Act and communicate the decision to the assessee at the earliest. As observed, the assessee is given liberty to restore these appeals in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall entertain the prayer without insisting upon any application to be filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appeals and on such request made by the assessee by filing a Miscellaneous 6/8 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.79 & 80 of 2020 Petition for Restoration, the Registry shall place such petition before the Division Bench for orders. 8. With this observation, the Tax Case Appeals stand disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and Consequently, the Substantial Questions of Law are left open. No costs. (T.S.S.,J) (R.P.A.,J) 27.11.2020 (½) Kak Index: Yes / No Internet: Yes / No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai. 7/8 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.79 & 80 of 2020 T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. AND R.PONGIAPPAN, J. Kak T.C.A.Nos.79 & 80 of 2020 27.11.2020 8/8 http://www.judis.nic.in

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →