Shri M.r. Durai Raj222, Dr. Radhakrishnan Road,Coimbatore – 641 012 v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,Company Circle – 1(3),Coimbatore

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 21.04.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Tax Case Appeal No.709 of 2016 Shri M.R. Durai Raj222, Dr. Radhakrishnan Road,Coimbatore – 641 012. ...Appellant Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Company Circle – 1(3),Coimbatore. ... Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras "D" Bench, dated 26.04.2016 passed inI.T.A.No.2510/Mds/2014, Assessment Year 2007-08 and againstthe order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) I,Coimbatore, dated 22.08.20214 made in Appeal No.48/13-14 andagainst the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax,company Circle -I(3) Coimbatore, dated 26.02.2013, made in PANNo.ACGPD9351F For Appellant : Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan For Respondent : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar Senior Standing Counsel J U D G M E N T(Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directedagainst the order dated 26.04.2016 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench, ('the Tribunal' forbrevity) in I.T.A.No.2510/Mds/2014 for the assessment year2007-08. The above appeal has been admitted on 03.10.2016 onthe following Substantial Questions of Law: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ "1.Whether the Tribunal was right in notholding that the value of property allotted to theAssessee in the course of settlement with hisbrothers should be the fair market value ofproperty given up by the Assessee in exchange forthe property allotted to him? 2.Whether the Tribunal was right in holdingthat the provisions of Section 49 of the Act shouldbe invoked for determination of the cost ofacquisition in the exchange of properties betweenthe co-owners?” 2. We have heard Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.SubbarayaAiyar Padmanabhan, learned counsel for the appellant/assesseeand Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel forthe respondent/Revenue. 3. 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. 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for theappellant/ assessee that the assessee had already been issuedwith Form-3 on 08.04.2021 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-VII) //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench Madras "D" Bench 2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle – 1(3), Coimbatore. Company Circle – 1(3), Coimbatore. 3. The Commissiner of Income Tax (Appeals) I, Coimbatore. Coimbatore. +1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Advocate SR.No.24207 +1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan, Advocate SR.No.24199 Tax Case Appeal No.709 of 2016 BR(CO)GMY(29/06/2021)