Prof.k.radha Shanmugasundaram v. The Income Tax Officer,Salary Ward – Ii(3),Chennai – 600 034

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 30.04.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA TAX CASE APPEAL NO.164 OF 2015 Prof.K.Radha Shanmugasundaram,No.9, 2[nd] Cross Street,Seethamma Extension, Teynampet,Chennai – 600 018. ... Appellant/Respondent Vs. The Income Tax Officer,Salary Ward – II(3),Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondent/Appellant Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras "A" Bench, dated 04.07.2014 passed inI.T.A.No.1243/Mds/2009. Against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-IV, Chennai, dated 26.05.2009 and made in AppealNo.CIT(A)-IV/CHE/126/08-09 against the Assessment order dated31.12.2008 of Income Tax Officer, Salary Ward II (3), Chennaiand made in G.I.R.No.P.A.NO.AEJPR6424E for the Assessment Year2006-07. For Appellant : Mr.M.Kaushikfor Mr.S.SridharFor Respondent : Mr.M.Swaminathan : Mr.M.SwaminathanSenior Standing Counseland Ms.S.PremalathaStanding Counsel J U D G M E N T(Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directedagainst the order dated 04.07.2014 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench, ('the Tribunal' forbrevity) in I.T.A.No.1243/Mds/2009 for the assessment year2006-07. The above appeal has been admitted on 30.03.2015 on thefollowing Substantial Questions of Law: "1.Whether the Tribunal is correct in law inapproving the stand of the respondent in reckoningthe transfer from the joint development agreementdated 28.04.2005 within the scope of the provisionsof section 2(47) of the Act for the purpose ofcomputing Long Term Capital Gains for taxation in theprevious year relating to the assessment year underconsideration (2006-07)? 2.Whether the Tribunal is correct in law inapproving the computation of Long Term Capital Gainsin relation to the deemed transfer as per Section 2(47) of the Act based on the adoption of notionalvalue of the cost of construction to be met by thedeveloper for the appellant in lieu of the undividedshare of land without taking into account theprovisions in Section 50C of the Act?” 2. We have heard Mr.M.Kaushik for Mr.S.Sridhar, learnedcounsel for the appellant/assessee and Mr.M.Swaminathan, learnedSenior Standing Counsel and Ms.S.Premalatha, learned StandingCounsel 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-3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ on 12.02.2021 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. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarmknTo1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench 2.The Income Tax Officer,Salary Ward – II(3),Chennai – 600 034.3.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV,121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034.+1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate, S.R.No.26515Tax Case Appeal No.164 of 2015GJ(CO)CS/08/07/2021