S. Gowri v. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Taxcentral Circle - 1 (2).Chennai - 600 034

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA Tax Case Appeal Nos.708 of 2015 S. Gowri v. Asst. Commissioner of Income TaxCentral Circle - 1 (2).Chennai - 600 034.... Respondent PRAYER:Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench, dated 12.12.2013 passedin I.T.A.No.1976/Mds/2012 for the assessment Year 2006-07appal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-I, 46, M.G.Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34 made inITA No.63/11-12 dated 14/08/12, Assessment Year 2006-07,appeal against the order of the Assistant Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Central Circle-I(2) No.46, M.G.Road, Chennai-34made in PAN. /Penalty/06-07 daed 30.06.2011,Assessment Year 2006-07. (Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) This appeal is filed by the assessee under Section 260Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), isdirected against the order dated 12.12.2013 passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench, ('theTribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.1976/Mds/2012 for theassessment year 2006-2007. 2. The appeal was admitted on the following substantialhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/questions of law:- " Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right inrestoring the penalty under Sec.271(1) (c ), whenthe sworn statements recorded clearly show that theincome was earned by the appellant's husband andinvested in the name of the appellant? 2. Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right inrestoring the penalty under S.271(1) (c ), when theadditions had been made only on the basis of theoffer made by the appellant's husband in good faithand to avoid litigation? 3. Whether Explanation 5A to Sec.271(1) (c )is applicable to a situation where there was nofinding by the Department that the assessee wasthe owner of any money bullion, jewellery or othervaluable investment etc., not disclosed to theDepartment; but additions were made only on thebasis of offer by the assessee's husband?” 3. We have heard Mrs.Sri Niranjani, learned counsel forthe appellant/assessee and Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned SeniorCounsel for the respondent/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 09.12.2020 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. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(VI) //True copy//https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sub Assistant Registrar gv To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench. 2.Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1 (2). Chennai - 600 034. 3. The Commissioner of Incoem Tax (Appeals) I 46, M.G.Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34.+1cc to Mrs.Sri Niranjani, Advocate SR.No.27925+1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate SR.No.27817 Tax Case Appeal No.708 of 2015 SR II(CO)GMY(16/07/2021)