Saroj Vinod Kumar Jain v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
20 Jan 2021 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Saroj Vinod Kumar Jain v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
20 Jan 2021
Assessment year(s)
2008-09
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Saroj Vinod Kumar Jain v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2021) decided the matter.
Issue: (ii) Whether the the finding of the Tribunal on the sale transaction entered into by the appellant not being genuine, is vitiated by perversity ?" Page 2/6 3..
Decision: With this observation, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and Consequently, the Substantial Questions of Law are left open.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20.01.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI
Tax Case Appeal No.826 of 2017
Saroj Vinod Kumar Jain ... Appellant v. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 9, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Nungambakkam, Chennai. ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B'
Bench, Chennai, dated 08.03.2017 passed in I.T.A.No.2348/Mds/2016.
For Appellant : Ms. N.V.Lakshmi for Mr. N.V. BalajiFor Respondent : Mr.T. Ravikumar Standing Counsel
Page 1/6
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered by M. DURAISWAMY, J)
This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directed against the order dated 08.03.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.2348/Mds/2016 for
the Assessment Year 2008-09.
2. The appeal was admitted on 06.03.2018 on the following
substantial questions of law:-
" (i) Whether the Tribunal erred in law in treating the gains on sale of shares as short term capital gains instead of long term capital gains by taking into account the date of dematerializaton of shares and not the date of purchase there of?
(ii) Whether the the finding of the Tribunal on the sale
transaction entered into by the appellant not being genuine, is vitiated by perversity ?"
Page 2/6
3.. We have heard Ms. N.V.Lakshmi, learned counsel for the
appellant/assessee and Mr.T. Ravikumar, learned Standing Counsel for
the respondent/Revenue.
4. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide the Substantial
Questions of Law framed for consideration on account of certain
subsequent developments. The Government of India enacted the Direct Tax
Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) to provide for resolution of
disputed tax and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act of the Parliament received the assent of the President on 17[th] March
2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17[th] March 2020.
5. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/assessee
that the assessee has already filed the declaration on 22.12.2020 under
Section 4 of the Act.
Page 3/6
6. In the light of the fact that the assessee has already availed the
benefit under the Act, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this appeal pending. At the same time, safeguarding the interest of the assessee in the event the order to be passed by the Department under the Act is not in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of on the ground that the assessee has already filed a declaration and the Department shall process the application at the earliest in accordance with the said Act and communicate the decision to the assessee at the earliest. As observed, the assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall entertain the prayer without insisting upon any application to be filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appeal and on such request made by the assessee by filing a Miscellaneous Petition for Restoration, the Registry shall place such petition before the Division Bench for orders.
Page 4/6
7. With this observation, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and Consequently, the Substantial Questions of Law are left open. No costs.
Page 4/6
7. With this observation, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and Consequently, the Substantial Questions of Law are left open. No costs.
(M.D.,J.) (T.V.T.S.,J.) 20.01.2021 2/3Index: Yes/NoInternet: Yes Rj To1. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 9, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai.2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai
Page 5/6
Page 6/6
M. DURAISWAMY, J.and T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
Rj
Tax Case Appeal No.826 of 2017
20.01.2021
2/3
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.