Disposed

Mr.Vijay Kumar Rungta v. Income Tax Officer

Madras HC5 Feb 2021TCA/741/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench disposed of the appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as the assessee had already filed a declaration under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The substantial questions of law were left open pending the outcome of the settlement process.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed on ground of filing under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020; liberty to restore if final decision unfavorable.

Mr.Vijay Kumar Rungta Vs Income Tax Officer — Income Tax | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 05.02.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON-BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY AND THE HON-BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI

¶5

Tax Case Appeal No.741 of 2016

¶6

Vijay Kumar Rungta ...Appellant v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), 15, Gandhiji Road, Erode ? 638 001. ...Respondent

¶7

Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A“ Bench, Chennai dated 07.04.2016 passed in I.T.A.No.179/Mds/2016 for the assessment year 2007~08 against the order of the Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals)-3 Coimbatore, dated 26/11/2015 in ITA.No.304/14-15(A)-1 in against the order of Income Tax Officer Ward – I(3) Erode, dated 16.10.2014 in PAN No.AAAPR7527B for Assessment Year 2007-2008

¶8

For Appellant : Ms. G. Janani for M/s. Lakshmi Kumaran For Respondent : Mr.T.R. Senthil Kumar Senior Standing Counsel Asst.by Ms. K.G. Usha Rani Junior Standing Counsel

¶9

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 07.04.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A“ Bench, Chennai (-the Tribunal- for brevity) in I.T.A.No.179/Mds/2016 for the assessment year 2007~08.

¶10

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶11

The appeal was admitted on 29.10.2016 on the following Substantial Questions of Law:

¶12

“ Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in treating the amount as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act when no investment was made by the appellant and ;the amount was only in the nature of loan??

¶13

We have heard Ms. G. Janani, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.T.R. Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

¶14

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

¶15

We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/assessee that the assessee has already filed the requisite Form ~ 1 on 31.01.2021 under Section 4 of the Act.

¶16

. 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 requisite Form ~ 1 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.

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

With these observations, the Tax Case Appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and Consequently, the Substantial Questions of Law are left open. No costs.

¶19

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Rj
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai “A“ Bench .
2. The Income Tax Officer,
Ward 1(3),
15, Gandhiji Road,
Erode ? 638 001.
3. Commissioner of the Income Tax,
(Appeals)-3,
Coimbatore.
+1cc to M/s.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.6394
+1cc to M/s.Lakshmi Kumaran, Advocate, S.R.No.6351
Tax Case Appeal No.741 of 2016
KV(CO)
KKV/26/02/2021

¶20

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Mr.Vijay Kumar Rungta v. Income Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Vijay Kumar Rungta v. Income Tax Officer

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

Smt.R.Swarna Vs the Assistant Commissioner

M/S. Sri Devi Karumari & Co. Vs the Deputy Commissioner of

M/S. Sri Devi Karumari & Co. Vs the Deputy Commissioner of

Dr. S.Muthian Vs Asst.Commissioner of Income

M/S Brakes India Ltd. Vs the Deputy Commissioner of

The Commissione of Income Vs M/S Kutty Flush Doors and