C.m.p v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,Non-Corporate Circle-15,Chennai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR Tax Case (Appeal) No.774 of 2018and C.M.P.No.18819 of 2018 Smt.Charumathy Seshadri ... Appellant/Respondent -vs- The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Non-Corporate Circle-15,Chennai. ... Respondent Tax Case (Appeal) filed under Section 260-A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income-tax AppellateTribunal, “C” Bench, Chennai, dated 09.10.2017, passed inI.T.A.No.886/Mds/2017 for the assessment year 2011-12, againstthe order of Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai dated13/3/2014 in BAYPS8008k/2010-11 and against the order ofCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Chennai dated ITANo.186/CIT (A) 15/2014-15/Assessment Year 2011-12 dated23/12/2016. For Respondent :Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar Ms.K.G.Usharani Standing Counsel This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against theorder of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Chennai,dated 09.10.2017, passed in I.T.A.No.886/Mds/2017 for theassessment year 2011-12 in so far as it remands the matter tothe Assessing Officer to determine the extent of landappurtenant to the building and with the direction to re- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ determine the eligible deduction under Section 54F of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). 2.This Appeal has been filed by raising the followingsubstantial questions of law:- 1) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, having rightly held that the appellant hadmade out a case for deduction u/s 54F, was right inlaw to remitting the matter for determination of theclaim to extent of land appurtenant to the buildingto the assessing officer? 2) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunalwas right in law in holding that to claim adeduction u/s. 54F, land appurtenant to the buildingshould be taken into consideration, even thoughassessee had constructed a residential house in thesaid land? 3.Heard Mr.R.Sivaraman, learned counsel for the petitionerand Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar and Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned StandingCounsel for the respondent. 4.As against the substantive portion of the order passed bythe Tribunal dated 09.10.2017, namely, that the assessee isentitled to the deduction under Section 54F of the Act, therevenue filed a tax case appeal before the Hon'ble DivisionBench of this Court in T.C(A).No.293 of 2018. The Hon'bleDivision Bench after taking into consideration the factualposition as recorded by the Appellate Commissioner as well asthe Tribunal found that there is no substantial question of lawinvolved in the matter and accordingly, the appeal filed by therevenue in T.C(A).No.293 of 2018 was dismissed by judgmentdated 17.07.2018. 5.The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent revenuewould contend that the present appeal filed by the assessee hasbecome infructuous. 6.We do not agree with the said submission since theentitlement for deduction under Section 54F of the Act as foundby the Tribunal has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Division Benchin T.C.(A).No.293 of 2018. The said issue having attainedfinality, the question of remanding the matter to the AssessingOfficer for fresh consideration does not arise. 7.Thus, for the above reasons, the appeal filed by theassesee is allowed and the substantial questions of law areanswered in favour of the assessee. No costs. Consequently,connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True Copy// 5.The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent revenuewould contend that the present appeal filed by the assessee hasbecome infructuous. 6.We do not agree with the said submission since theentitlement for deduction under Section 54F of the Act as foundby the Tribunal has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Division Benchin T.C.(A).No.293 of 2018. The said issue having attainedfinality, the question of remanding the matter to the AssessingOfficer for fresh consideration does not arise. 7.Thus, for the above reasons, the appeal filed by theassesee is allowed and the substantial questions of law areanswered in favour of the assessee. No costs. Consequently,connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarcseTo1.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Circle-15, Chennai.2.The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Chennai.3.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-15, Chennai.4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle 15(1), Chennai.+1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate Sr.2952+1cc to Mr.R.Sivaraman, Advocate Sr.2888 Tax Case (Appeal) No.774 of 2018and C.M.P.No.18819 of 2018 sj[co]srg 27/02/2019 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/