A.sundaram v. The Commissioner Income Tax,Salem

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA Tax Case Appeal Nos.284 to 288 of 2016 A.Sundaram Vs. The Commissioner Income Tax,Salem. ... Respondent in all TCAs PRAYER:Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench, dated 15.05.2015 passedin I.T.A.Nos.102 to 106/Mds/2015 for the assessment year 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. Against the Commissioenr of Income Tax (Appeals) Salem-7 dated31.10.2014 in ITA.No. 162/2007-08, ITA.No. 163/2007-08,ITA.No.164/2007-08, ITA.No.165/2007-08, ITA.No. 166 of 2007-08, for the Assessment Year 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06 respectively against the Assistant Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Circle III, Salem –7, dated 31.12.2007 GIR.No/PANAIJPS2986P/3DPSO 149 for the Assessment Year 2001-02, 2002-03,2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06 respectively. For Respondent : Mrs.V.Pushpa,(in all TCAs) Senior Standing Counsel The appeals filed by the assessee under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), are directedagainst the order dated 15.05.2015 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal'for brevity) in I.T.A.Nos.102 to 106/Mds/2015 for theassessment year 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. 2.The above appeals were admitted on the followingSubstantial Questions of Law for consideration: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunalwas justified in confirming the addition of creditsin current account of LVB in the status of'individual' as against the claim of the assesseefor assessment in the status of HUF based on theregistered partition effected in 1954? 2)Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunalwas justified in confirming the addition withoutgiving any finding on the evidence produced for thetextile business carried on by HUF of Arthanari asearly as in 1971? 3)Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case and in the light of theSupreme Court decision in 73 ITR 539, the AppellateTribunal ought to have deleted the addition of bankbalances by holding that it was assessable only inthe hands of HUF of Arthanari? 4)Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunalwas justified in not deleting the additionconsidering that the balance in current account ofLVB had been returned in the HUF assessment of theassessee and a total tax of Rs.7,25,212/- paidtherein resulting in double taxation of the sameamount which is against the canons of taxationlaws?” 3. We have heard Mr.T.Vasudevan, learned counsel for theappellant/assessee and Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the respondent/Revenue. 4. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide theSubstantial Questions of Law framed for consideration onaccount of certain subsequent developments. The Government ofIndia enacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3of 2020) to provide for resolution of disputed tax and formatters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act ofthe Parliament received the assent of the President on 17[th]March 2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17[th] March2020. 5.We are informed by the learned counsel for theappellant/ assessee that the assessee has already been issuedwith Form – 3 on 16.12.2020 in all the above appeals. 3. We have heard Mr.T.Vasudevan, learned counsel for theappellant/assessee and Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the respondent/Revenue. 4. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide theSubstantial Questions of Law framed for consideration onaccount of certain subsequent developments. The Government ofIndia enacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3of 2020) to provide for resolution of disputed tax and formatters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act ofthe Parliament received the assent of the President on 17[th]March 2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17[th] March2020. 5.We are informed by the learned counsel for theappellant/ assessee that the assessee has already been issuedwith Form – 3 on 16.12.2020 in all the above appeals. 6. In the light of the fact that the assessee has alreadyavailed the benefit under the Act, no useful purpose would beserved in keeping these appeals pending. At the same time,safeguarding the interest of the assessee in the event theorder to be passed by the Department under the Act is not infavour of the assessee. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal ishttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/dismissed on the ground that the assessee has already been issued with Form - 3 in all the above appeals and theDepartment shall process the applications at the earliest inaccordance with the said Act and communicate the decision tothe assessee at the earliest. As observed, the assessee isgiven liberty to restore these appeals in the event theultimate decision to be taken on the declaration filed by theassessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour ofthe assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shallentertain the prayer without insisting upon any application tobe filed for condonation of delay in restoration of theappeals and on such request made by the assessee by filing aMiscellaneous Petition for Restoration, the Registry shallplace such petition before the Division Bench for orders. 7. With this observation, the Tax Case Appeals aredismissed with the aforementioned liberty and consequently,the Substantial Questions of Law are left open. No costs. Sd/-Assistant Registrar (CS-VII)//True Copy//Sub Assistant RegistrarvaTo1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench 2.The Commissioner Income Tax, Salem. 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle III, Salem. 4.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem – 7. Copy To The Assistant Registrar,Appeal Examiner Main Section,High Court, Madras 104. +1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate, S.R.No. 26256 JP(CO)GN(05/07/2021) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Tax Case Appeal Nos.284 to 288 of 2016