M/S. Ttk Healthcare Limited v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle – 3 (1), Chennai - 600 034

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 23.06.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA Tax Case Appeal No.586 of 2017and C.M.P.No.14636 of 2017 M/s. TTK Healthcare Limited,6, Cathedral Road,Chennai - 600 086.PAN : ... Appellantvs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Corporate Circle – 3 (1),Chennai - 600 034. ... Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras "C" Bench, dated 25.11.2016 passed inI.T.A.No.1642/Mds/2016. Against the order of the commissionerof Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Chennai-34, order dated 28-03-2016made in ITA No. 53/CIT(A)-II/2013-14 against the order of theDeputty commissioner of Income Tax company circle-III (2),Chennai-600 034, order dated 20-03-2014 made in GIR/PAN No. for the assessment years 2011-12. For Appellant : Mr.R.Venkat Narayanan for M/s. Subbarya Ayyar Padmanabhan. For Respondent : Mrs.S.Premalatha for Mr.M.Swaminathan, Senior Standing Counsel This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directedagainst the order dated 25.11.2016 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench, ('the Tribunal' forbrevity) in I.T.A.No.1642/Mds/2016 for the assessment year2011-2012. 2. The appellant has raised the following substantialhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/questions of law in the above appeal:- " 1.Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal was rightin law in not adjudicating whether the disallowanceunder Section 37, by relying on CBDT Circular whichcould not have retrospective effect, could be madeby an order under Section 154 of the Act? 2.Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal was rightin law in considering the CBDT Circular dated01.08.2012 which could not have retrospectiveeffect?" 3. We have heard Mr.R. Venkat Narayanan, learned counselfor the appellant/assessee and Mrs.S.Premalatha forMr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for therespondent/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 had already been issuedwith Form-3 on 10.06.2021 and the learned counsel for theappellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw theappeal. 6. In view of the submission made by the learned counselfor the appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed aswithdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneouspetition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mtl To 1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench 2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle – 3 (1), Chennai - 600 034.https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Corporate Circle – 3 (1), Chennai - 600 034.https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Chennai-34,4. The Deputty commissioner of Income Tax, company circle-III (2), Chennai-600 034. +1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate SR.No. 29113 Tax Case Appeal No.586 of 2017 CP(CO) B.VC(20.07.2021)