M/S.ramgosri Construction P. Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer (Osd),Company Circle – V(3),Chennai – 600 034

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 02.02.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVITax Case Appeal No.925 of 2009 M/s.Ramgosri Construction P. Ltd.,No.225, Mettukuppam,Okkiam, Thoraipakkam,Chennai – 600 096. ...Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer (OSD),Company Circle – V(3),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 "B" Bench, dated 30.04.2009 passed inI.T.A.No.1536/Mds/ 2006. Appeals filed the order passed by the comissioner ofIncome Tax Appeals XII chennai 34 made in ITA.283-287/05-06Dated 07.02.2006 against the Assessment Order for the Year1999-2000 and 1998-1999 made in PAN AABCR 9988E dated31.03.1998 & 31.03.1999 on the file of the Deputy Commisionerof Income Tax Company Circle(V)(3),Chennai 34. This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directedagainst the order dated 30.04.2009 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras "B" Bench, ('the Tribunal' forbrevity) in I.T.A.No.1536/Mds/2006 for the assessment year1999-2000. The above appeal has been admitted on 12.10.2009 onhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/the following Substantial Questions of Law: “1)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correctin law in accepting the appeal (s) of thedepartment/respondent relating to the assessmentyears 1998-99 and 1999-2000 even though there wasno plea to consider the business loss claimed as acapital loss? 2)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct inlaw in rejecting the claim of business loss againstthe property income within the scope of theprovisions governing the inter-head set off in thecomputation of taxable total income uponoverlooking relevant materials and further overstepping the ambit of the proceedings before themin the light of the decision rendered by this Courtin the first round?” 2. We have heard Mr.M.Kaushik, learned counsel for theappellant/ assessee and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned SeniorStanding Counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 3. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide theSubstantial Question 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. 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for theappellant/ assessee that the assessee had already been issuedwith Form – 3 on 22.01.2021 and the learned counsel for theappellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw theappeal. 5. In view of the submission made by the learned counselfor the appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed aswithdrawn. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "B" Bench 2.The Income Tax Officer (OSD), Company Circle – V(3),Chennai – 600 034. 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle(V)(3),Chennai 34. Tax Case Appeal No.925 of 2009A.SK(22.02.2021).