M/S.NAGARAJ & COMPANY PVT.LTD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court did not decide the substantial questions of law. It was informed that the assessee had opted for the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, and had been issued Form-3. Based on the assessee's submission and request to withdraw the appeal, the High Court dismissed the Tax Case Appeal as withdrawn. The appeal was admitted on substantial questions of law concerning the treatment of capital profits on the sale of fixed assets for book profit computation under Section 115JB. However, due to the subsequent enactment of the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and the assessee's decision to avail its benefits, the merits of the substantial questions of law were not adjudicated upon. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The assessee, M/s. Nagaraj & Company Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 02.08.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench. The appeal pertained to Assessment Year 2007-08. The substantial questions of law framed by the High Court concerned the treatment of capital profit on the sale of fixed assets for the purpose of calculating book profits under Section 115JB of the Act. The High Court was informed that the assessee had opted for the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, and had been issued Form-3. Consequently, the assessee sought to withdraw the appeal.
What were the issues?
1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the capital profit on the sale of the fixed assets of the company cannot be taken directly to the reserves and surplus in the balance sheet and must be routed through the profit and loss account to arrive at the correct book profits under Section 115JB of the Act? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in reworking the profits under Section 115JB as Rs.3,58,79,307/- on the ground that the profit on the sale of land credited to the capital reserves by the appellant should be treated as normal profits for arriving at book profits under Section 115JB? Assessee's Contention: The assessee sought to withdraw the appeal. Revenue's Contention: Not recorded.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Tax Case Appeal No.809 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.02.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI Tax Case Appeal No.809 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.17862 of 2016 M/s. Nagaraj & Company Pvt. Ltd., 156, Developed Industrial Estate, Perungudi, Chennai - 600 096 PAN AAACBN2265K
... Appellant v.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-IV(4) Chennai - 600 034.
... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Chennai dated 02.08.2016 passed in ITA.No.450/Mds/2016 for the Assessment Year 2007.08. Page 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Tax Case Appeal No.809 of 2016 For Appellant : Mr. R. Srinivasan
For Respondent : Mr. Karthik Ranganathan, Standing Counsel J U D G M E N T (Judgment was Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J) This appeal filed by theassessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directed against the order dated 02.08.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I..TA.No.450/Mds/2016 for the Assessment Year 2007.08. 2. The appeal was admitted on 21.11.2016 on the following Substantial Question s of Law: “(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the capital profit on the sale of the fixed assets of the company cannot be taken directly to the reserves and surplus in the balance sheet and the same has to be routed through the profit and loss account to arrive at the correct Page 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Tax Case Appeal No.809 of 2016 book profits under section 115JB of the Act? and (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in reworking the profits under section 115JB as Rs.3,58,79,307/- on the ground that the profit on the sale of land credited to the capital reserves by the appellant are to be treated as normal profits for arriving at book profits under section 115JB? " .3. We have heard Mr. R. Srinivasan, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Karthik Ranganathan, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. 4. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide the Substantial 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 Page 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Tax Case Appeal No.809 of 2016 17th March 2020. 5. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant that the assessee has already been issued with Form – 3 on 29.12.2020 and the learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the appeal. 6. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. [M.D., J.] [T.V.T.S., J.] 18.02.2021 Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes Rj To 1. The The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai “C” Bench 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-IV(4) Page 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Tax Case Appeal No.809 of 2016 Chennai - 600 034. M. DURAISWAMY, J. and T.V. THAMILSELVI, J. Rj Tax Case Appeal No.809 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.17862 of 2016
18.02.2021 Page 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
More judgments on Section 115JB
- Azure Knowledge Corporation Private… vs The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2013/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Digjam Limited, Jamnagar vs The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 349/RJT/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Braithwaite & Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs DCIT, Circle 1(1), KolkataITA 1076/KOL/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2021-2022
- DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Private…ITA 964/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur… vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Private…ITA 963/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026