The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Business Circle Xvi, Chennai v. Shri M. Ponnusamy

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.02.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI Tax Case Appeal No.708 of 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Business Circle XVI,Chennai. ...Appellant v.Shri M. Ponnusamy ... Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, “C” Bench, Chennai dated 26.06.2009 passed inITA.No.1699/Mds/2008 for the Assessment Year 2004-05. Appealagainst it o/o the commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) XII,121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungmbakkam, Chennai 35 and made inITA.No.257/2006-07 order dt.16/05/2008 and against the O/o theJoint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range XIV Chennai and madein PAN.NO. order dt:28/12/2000 for the Assesssmentyear 2004-05. For Appellant : Mr. Karthik Ranganathan, Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr. V.P. Sengotuvel This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directedagainst the order dated 26.06.2009 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' forbrevity) in I..TA.No.1699/Mds/2008 for the Assessment Year2004-05. 2. The appeal was admitted on 09.11.2010 on the followingSubstantial Question s of Law: “(i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ holding that joint venture could not be ignored forattracting section 2(22)(e) of the Act contrary to229 ITR 444(SC)? (ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right indismissing the appeal of the revenue when the legalfiction of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(2)comes into play as soon as the moneys paid by thecompany to the Assessee? (iii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right inrejecting the addition without considering that thewithdrawals made when there is a debit balance inthe current account is treated as deemed dividendas per 76 ITR 369 (Bom) confirmed by the Apex Courtin 105 ITR 642 (SC)?" 3. We have heard Mr. Karthik Ranganathan, learned StandingCounsel for the appellant and Mr.V.P. Sengotuvel, learnedStanding Counsel for the respondent. 4. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide theSubstantial Question 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 that the assessee has already been issued with Form– 3 on 22.02.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellantseeks permission of this Court to withdraw the appeal. 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai “C” Bench Chennai “C” Bench https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-XII, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Raod, Nungambakkam,Chennai-34. (Appeals)-XII, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Raod, Nungambakkam,Chennai-34. 3.The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range, XIV, Chennai. Range, XIV, Chennai. +1cc to M/s.V.Baranidharan, Advocate SR.10525 RR(CO)CB(18/03/2021) Tax Case Appeal No.708 of 2010