COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.VGN BUILDERS PVT LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted that the assessee had filed a declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, and was awaiting orders. Consequently, the Court directed the Competent Authority to process the application under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, and pass appropriate orders expeditiously. The assessee was granted liberty to restore the appeals if the ultimate decision on their declaration was not in their favour. In light of this subsequent event, the appeals were disposed of, and the substantial questions of law were left open. No decision was made on the merits of the substantial questions of law.
What were the facts?
The Revenue has filed three appeals (T.C.A.Nos.816 to 818 of 2019) under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the order dated 03.10.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('the Tribunal') 'B' Bench, Chennai. These appeals pertain to assessment years 2012-13, 2014-15, and 2013-14, respectively. The appeals were admitted by the High Court on specific substantial questions of law. During the pendency of these appeals, the respondent-assessee, M/s.VGN Builders Private Limited, filed a declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme on 31.01.2021 and was awaiting orders.
What were the issues?
The Tribunal had to decide three substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the Tribunal erred in holding that there was no violation of Section 47(xiii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Whether the Tribunal erred in not considering that on succession, the cost of acquisition of the asset to the previous owner should be taken as the cost of acquisition to the successor entity as per Section 45(2) of the Act. 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the firm bore the cost of additions created in the current account of the partners of the erstwhile firm and such revaluation was done at a cost. The Revenue contended that the Tribunal's findings on these issues were incorrect. The Assessee submitted that it had filed a declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and was awaiting orders.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
T.C.A.Nos.816 to 818 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 23.02.2021 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA T.C.A.Nos.816 to 818 of 2019 Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 3, Chennai. .. Appellant in all Appeals
-vs- M/s.VGN Builders Private Limited, 333, Poonamallee Road, Amaaindakarai, Chennai-600 029. PAN: AADCV1416B .. Respondent in all Appeals Appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 03.10.2018, made in I.T.A.Nos.1124, 1126 & 1125/Chny/2018 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment years 2012-13, 2014-15 and 2013-14 respectively. For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan, (In all Appeals) Senior Standing Counsel & Ms.V.Pushpa, Junior Standing Counsel 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.Nos.816 to 818 of 2019 For Respondent : Mr.V.Ayyapparaja (In all Appeals) ****** COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) These appeals have been filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) challenging the order dated 03.10.2018, made in I.T.A.Nos.1124, 1126 & 1125/Chny/2018 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity) for the assessment years 2012-13, 2014-15 and 2013-14 respectively. 2.The appeals were admitted, on 11.11.2019, on the following substantial questions of law: “1.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in holding that there was no violation of the provisions of Section 47(xiii) of the Act? 2.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in not considering that on succession, the cost of 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.Nos.816 to 818 of 2019 acquisition of the asset to the previous owner should be taken as the cost of acquisition of the asset to the successor entity as per Section 45(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? and 3.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the firm has borne the cost of additions created in the current account of the partners of erstwhile firm and such revaluation has been done at a cost?” 3.We have heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Junior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.V.Ayyapparaja, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee. 4.The learned counsel on behalf of the respondent/assessee submits that the respondent/assessee already filed the declaration/undertaking under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme on 31.01.2021, and is awaiting orders to be passed in Form No.1. 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.Nos.816 to 818 of 2019 5.In the light of the subsequent event, the Competent Authority shall process the application/declaration in accordance with the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible. 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 applications to be filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appeals and on such request made by the assessee by filing miscellaneous petitions for restoration, the Registry shall place such petitions before the appropriate Division Bench for orders. 6.The tax case appeals stand disposed of with the aforementioned liberty. Consequently, the substantial questions of law framed are left open. No costs. (T.S.S., J.) (R.N.M., J.) 23.02.2021 Index: Yes/ No Speaking Order : Yes/ No abr 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.Nos.816 to 818 of 2019 T.S.Sivagnanam, J. and R.N.Manjula, J. (abr) To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai. T.C.A.Nos.816 to 818 of 2019 23.02.2021
5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
More judgments on Section 47(xiii)
- Snb Infrastructure Private Limited, Mumbai vs DCIT Circle 14(1)(2), MumbaiITA 8603/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed24 Jul 2026AY 2015-16
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs M/S Atria Wind (Kadambur) Private Limited…ITA 1025/BANG/2025[2021]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2025
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs M/S Atria Wind (Kadambur) Private Limited…ITA 1024/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2025AY 2019-20
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs M/S Atria Wind (Kadambur) Private Limited…ITA 1023/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2025AY 2018-19
- The Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs M/S Atria Wind (Kadambur) Pvt LtdITA/103/20253 Sept 2025
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026