Disposed

M/S. Hindustan Powerplus v. the Deputy Commissioner of

Madras HC1 Feb 2021TC/1009/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Madras disposed of the Income Tax Appeal filed by M/s. Hindustan Powerplus Ltd. against the ITAT order. The Court held it unnecessary to decide the substantial questions of law as the assessee had already availed benefits under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, and granted liberty to restore the appeal if the settlement decision was unfavorable.

What did the court decide?

Tax Case Appeal disposed; Liberty granted to restore appeal if Department decision under DTVV Act is unfavorable.

M/S. Hindustan Powerplus Vs the Deputy Commissioner of — Income Tax | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Tax Case No.1009 of 2007

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 01.02.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI

¶6

Tax Case Appeal No.1009 of 2007
M/s. Hindustan Powerplus Ltd.,
NO.6B, G.S.T. Road,
St. Thomas Mount,
Chennai. ... Appellant
v.
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Circle- II(2),
Chennai - 600 034. ... Respondent

¶7

Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai, dated 31.01.2007 passed in I.T.A.Nos.920 to 922 /Mds/ 2005 for the assessment years 1997-98, 1998-99 and 19992000.

¶8

Page 1/6

¶9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶10

Tax Case No.1009 of 2007

¶11

For Appellant : Mr. S.P.Chidambaram For Respondent : Mr.T. Ravikumar Standing Counsel

¶12

J U D G M E N T (Judgment was 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 common order dated 31.01.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.Nos.920 to 922 /Mds/ 2005 for the assessment years 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-2000.

¶13

The appeal was admitted on 09.07.2007 on the following

¶14

Substantial Questions of Law:

¶15

the reassessment made under section 147 of the Act for the assessment year 97-98? and

¶16

Page 2/6

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶18

Tax Case No.1009 of 2007

¶19

(ii) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the unabsorbed depreciation is not available for set off while computing the income under section 115JA of the Income Tax Act?"

¶20

We have heard Mr. S.P.Chidambaram, learned counsel for the

¶21

appellant and Mr.T. Ravikumar, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

¶22

It may not be necessary for this Court to decide the Substantial

¶23

Questions of Law framed for consideration on account of certain subsequent developments. The Government of India enacted the Direct Tax

¶24

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

¶25

Act of the Parliament received the assent of the President on 17^th March

¶26

2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17^th March 2020.

¶27

We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/assessee

¶28

Page 3/6

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶30

Tax Case No.1009 of 2007

¶31

that the assessee has already filed the requisite Forms 1 and 2 on 29.01.2021 under Section 4 of the Act.

¶32

In the light of the fact that the assessee has already availed the

¶33

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

¶34

in the event the order to be passed by the Department under the Act is not

¶35

in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of on the ground that the assessee has already filed requisite Forms 1 and 2 and the Department shall process the application at the earliest in accordance with the said Act and communicate the decision to

¶36

the assessee at the earliest. As observed, the assessee is given liberty to

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

by the assessee by filing a Miscellaneous Petition for Restoration, the

¶40

Page 4/6

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶42

Tax Case No.1009 of 2007

¶43

Registry shall place such petition before the Division Bench for orders.

¶44

With these observations, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of

¶45

with the aforementioned liberty and Consequently, the Substantial

¶46

Questions of Law are left open. No costs.

¶47

(M.D.,J.) (T.V.T.S.,J.)
01.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
Rj
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai,
2. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Circle- II(2),
Chennai - 600 034.

¶48

Page 5/6

¶49

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶50

Tax Case No.1009 of 2007

¶51

M. DURAISWAMY, J. and T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.

¶52

¶53

Tax Case Appeal No.1009 of 2007
01.02.2021

¶54

Page 6/6

¶55

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

M/S. Hindustan Powerplus v. the Deputy Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Hindustan Powerplus v. the Deputy Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N. Damotharan Welfare Trust Vs the Income Tax Officer

Ashok Leyland Ltd., Vs the Joint Commr. of I.T.

Ashok Leyland Ltd., Vs the Joint Commr. of I.T.

The Commissioner of Income Vs Celebrity Fashions Ltd.

M/S Addison & Co. Limited, Vs the Deputy Commissioner of

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S Hari Krishna Papers Pvt.