M/S.murasoli Trustnew v. The Assistant Director Of Income Tax (Exemptions Iv),Chennai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 29.03.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI Tax Case Appeal No.6 of 2017 M/s.Murasoli TrustNew No.180, Old No.93,Kodambakkam High Road,Chennai – 600 034. ...Appellant Vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax (Exemptions IV),Chennai. ... Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras "A" Bench, dated 06.11.2015 passed inI.T.A.No.211/Mds/2014 for the assessment year 2010-11, asagainst the order dated 22.11.2013 by the office of theCommissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-VII, Chennai, in ITA.No.(s)575/11-12 & 119/12-13 assessment year 2009-10 and 2010-11 and asagainst the order dated 31.07.2012 in PAN/GIR.No.AAATM3312Koffice of the Assistant Director of Income Tax(Exemptions)-IV,Chennai, assessment year 2010-2011. For Appellant : Mr.M.Kaushik for Mr.S.Sridhar This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directedagainst the order dated 06.11.2015 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench, ('the Tribunal' forbrevity) in I.T.A.No.211/Mds/2014 for the assessment year 2010- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 11. The above appeal has been admitted on 23.01.2017 on thefollowing Substantial Questions of Law: "1.Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct inlaw in approving the presumption of the applicabilityof the amended provisions of Section 2(15) of the Actespecially the two provisos below the said section soas to brand the activities as commercial activitieseven though the said provisos would be applicable tothe last limb of the definition of the term'charitable purpose'? 2.Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct inlaw denying the claim of depreciation in the taxexemption computation as per Section 11 of the Act onthe wrong presumption of double deduction whichdefied the consistent judicial trend on the saidissue?” 2. We have heard Mr.M.Kaushik for Mr.S.Sridhar, learnedcounsel for the appellant/assessee and Mr.J.Narayanaswamy,learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 3. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide theSubstantial Questions of Law framed for consideration on accountof certain subsequent developments. The Government of Indiaenacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of2020) to provide for resolution of disputed tax and for mattersconnected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act of theParliament received the assent of the President on 17[th] March2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17[th] March 2020. 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form-3on 09.03.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seekspermission of this Court to withdraw the appeal. 5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel forthe appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed aswithdrawn. No costs. mkn To 1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench 2.The Assistant Director of Income Tax (Exemptions IV), Chennai. Income Tax (Exemptions IV), Chennai. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)VII, Chennai. Chennai. Tax Case Appeal No.6 of 2017SSN(CO)KM(29/04/2021)