An appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by M/s. Ramgosri Construction P. Ltd. was dismissed as withdrawn by the High Court of Judicature at Madras after the assessee sought permission using the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020.
The Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02.02.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI
Tax Case Appeal No.924 of 2009
M/s.Ramgosri Construction P. Ltd., No.225, Mettukuppam,
Okkiam, Thoraipakkam, Chennai – 600 096.
Chennai – 600 096. ... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer (OSD), Company Circle – V(3), Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "B" Bench, dated 30.04.2009 passed in I.T.A.No.1535/Mds/ 2006.
Appeals filed the order passed by the comissioner of Income Tax Appeals XII chennai 34 made in ITA.283-287/05-06 Dated 07.02.2006 against the Assessment Order for the Year 1999-2000 and 1998-1999 made in PAN AABCR 9988E dated 31.03.1998 & 31.03.1999 on the file of the Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax Company Circle(V)(3),Chennai 34.
For Respondent : Mrs.R.Hemalatha,
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 30.04.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "B" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.1535/Mds/2006 for the assessment year 1998-99. The above appeal has been admitted on 12.10.2009 on the following Substantial Questions of Law:
“1)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in accepting the appeal (s) of the department/respondent relating to the assessment years 1998-99 and 1999-2000 even though there was no plea to consider the business loss claimed as a capital loss?
2)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in rejecting the claim of business loss against the property income within the scope of the provisions governing the inter-head set off in the computation of taxable total income upon overlooking relevant materials and further over stepping the ambit of the proceedings before them in the light of the decision rendered by this Court in the first round?”
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
2.The Income Tax Officer (OSD), Company Circle – V(3), Chennai – 600 034.
3The Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax Company Circle(V)(3), Chennai 34.
+1cc to Mr.T.Ravi Kumar , Advocate SR.No. 5432 Tax Case Appeal No.924 of 2009 A.SK(22.02.2021).
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s.Ramgosri Construction P. Ltd.
The Income Tax Officer (OSD), Company Circle – V(3), Chennai – 600 034
M. DURUISWAMY
T.V. THAMILSELVI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
