Tca/97/2012 Of M/S Maruwa Electronic v. Commissioner Of Incometax-Ii

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI M/s.Maruwa Electronic (India) Pvt. Ltd.,180A, New No.126,Mount Poonamallee Road,Porur, Chennai – 600 116. ...Appellant Commissioner of Income Tax II,Chennai. ... Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai “C” Bench, dated 25.08.2011 passed inI.T.A.No.2070/Mds/2010, Assessment Year 2006-07. Preferredagainst the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-V, Chennai-34 dated 15.09.2010 made in ITA No.46/09-10preferred against the order passed by the Assistant Commissionerof Income Tax, Company Circle IV(1), Chennai-34 dated 29/06/2009in PAN.GIR No. /MA576 for the Assessment year 2006-07. (Delivered by M. DURAISWAMY, J) The appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directedagainst the order, dated 25.08.2011, passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras “C” Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ for brevity) in I.T.A.No.2070/Mds/2010 for the Assessment Year2006-07. The above appeal was admitted on 12.03.2012 on thefollowing Substantial Questions of Law: "1.Whether in the facts of the case and evidenceon record the Income Tax Tribunal was justified in lawin reversing the decision of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals) who had cancelled Section 271(1)(c) penalty of Rs.29,18,766/- levied by the AssessingOfficer for alleged furnishing of inaccurateparticulars and restoring the penalty on the groundthat the appellant had also concealed income which wasnot the case of the Assessing officer and withoutgiving an opportunity to the appellant? 2.Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal wasright in law in not following the settled legalprinciple that a mere making a claim for deduction,which may not be sustainable in law in the opinion ofthe Assessing Officer, by itself will not amount tofurnishing of inaccurate particulars of income?” 2. We have heard Mr.V.S.Jayakumar, learned counsel for theappellant/ assessee and Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned SeniorStanding Counsel and Mr.S.Rajesh, learned Standing Counsel forthe 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 theappellant/assessee that the assessee has already filed therequisite Forms 1 & 2 on 29.01.2021 under Section 4 of the Act. 5. In the light of the fact that the assessee has alreadyavailed the benefit under the Act, no useful purpose would beserved in keeping the appeal pending. At the same time,safeguarding the interest of the assessee in the event the orderto be passed by the Department under the Act is not in favour ofthe assessee. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for theappellant/assessee that the assessee has already filed therequisite Forms 1 & 2 on 29.01.2021 under Section 4 of the Act. 5. In the light of the fact that the assessee has alreadyavailed the benefit under the Act, no useful purpose would beserved in keeping the appeal pending. At the same time,safeguarding the interest of the assessee in the event the orderto be passed by the Department under the Act is not in favour ofthe assessee. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of on the ground that the assessee has already filed therequisite Forms 1 & 2 and the Department shall process theapplication at the earliest in accordance with the said Act andcommunicate the decision to the assessee at the earliest. Asobserved, the assessee is given liberty to restore the appeal inthe event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declarationfiled by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not infavour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registryshall entertain the prayer without insisting upon anyapplication to be filed for condonation of delay in restorationof the appeal and on such request made by the assessee by filinga Miscellaneous Petition for Restoration, the Registry shallplace such petition before the Division Bench for orders. 6. With this observation, the Tax Case Appeal standsdisposed of with the aforementioned liberty and consequently,the Substantial Questions of Law are left open. No costs. Sd/-Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar MKN To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “C” Bench, Chennai-34 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax II, Chennai.3. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-IV(1), Chennai-600 034 4. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-IV(1), Chennai-600 034 5. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle IV(1), Chennai. Tax Case Appeal No.97 of 2012(2/2) PM(CO)TE(23/04/2021)