M/S.haridas Huf v. Income Tax Officer,Non-Corporate Ward-1(3),121, Mahatma Gandhi Salai,Chennai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 05.01.2021CORAM : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMandThe Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA M/s.Haridas HUF,No.11, Radha Krishnan Street,T.Nagar, Chennai - 600017. ...Appellant Vs Income Tax Officer,Non-Corporate Ward-1(3),121, Mahatma Gandhi Salai,Chennai - 600034....Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 29.11.2019 made in ITA.No.1570/Chny/2019 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench forthe assessment year 2015-16 against the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2 Chennai in I.T.A.No.62/2017-2018 dated 28.03.2019 for the assessment year 2015-2016 against the order under section 143(3) of the ITA dated08.12.2017 for the Assessment year 2015-2016 passed by ITO New-1(3) Chennai in PAN on the file of Income Tax Officer(I/C) Non Corporate Ward 1(3) Chennai 34. For Appellant :Mr.N.V.BalajiFor Respondent:Mrs.R.Hemalatha Senior Standing CounselJUDGMENT(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J) This appeal has been filed by the assessee under Section260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity)challengingtheorderdated29.11.2019madeinITA.No.1570/Chny/2019 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' Bench ('the Tribunal' for brevity) for theassessment year 2015-16.2. The assessee has raised the following substantialquestions of law for consideration:“1. Whether Income Tax AppellateTribunal is right in upholding the order oflower authorities denying deduction inrespect of part of the land purchased by theappellant? https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. Whether under the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in remittingthe case back to the file of the assessingofficer, requiring him to examine afresh, onthe issue whether the appellant was eligiblefor deduction under section 54 of the Act? 3.Is the finding of the Tribunal thatPlot No.31 is presently vacant and cannot beconsidered as indivisible part of thebuilding constructed in plot 32, nor it isnecessary for the enjoyment of the property,not perverse?" 3. We have heard Mr.N.V.Balaji, learned counsel for theappellant and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counselappearing for the respondent/Revenue. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/assesseesubmits that the appellant/assessee has already filed thedeclaration/undertaking under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme on31.12.2020 and is awaiting orders to be passed in Form No.3. 5. In the light of the subsequent event, the CompetentAuthority shall process the application/declaration inaccordance with the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3of 2020) and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously aspossible. The assessee is given liberty to restore this appealin the event the ultimate decision to be taken on thedeclaration filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the saidAct is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made,the Registry shall entertain the prayer without insisting uponany application to be filed for condonation of delay inrestoration of the appeal and on such request made by theassessee by filing a miscellaneous petition for restoration, theRegistry shall place such petition before the appropriateDivision Bench for orders. 6. The tax case appeal stands disposed of with theaforementioned liberty and consequently, the substantialquestions of law framed are left open. No costs. -s/d- Assistant Registrar To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench. Madras 'C' Bench. 2. Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward-1(3), 121, Mahatma Gandhi Salai, Chennai – 600034. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2216, Aayakar Bhavan, Main Building II Floor121 Mahathma Gandhi RoadNungambakkam, Chennai 34.+1 CC to Mr.T. Ravikumar, Advocate sr 427.TCA.No.450 of 2020RGN(CO)SP(23/02/2021)