Madras High Court
A. Muralidharan vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 8 August, 2022
Author: R. Mahadevan
Bench: R. Mahadevan, Mohammed Shaffiq
Tax Case Appeal Nos.607 to 610 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.08.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
Tax Case Appeal Nos.607 to 610 of 2011
A. Muralidharan
No.699, Mettur Main Road,
Bhavani,
Erode District 638 301 ... Appellant in all appeals
Vs.
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Erode ... Respondent in all appeals
Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai “D”
Bench, dated 4.10.2011 passed in respective I.T.A.Nos.185, 186,189 &
1294/Mds/2011 for the respective Assessment Years 2005-06, 2007-08,
2007-08, 2006-07.
For Appellant : M/s.J.Sree Vidya
For Respondent : Mr.M.Swaminathan,
Standing counsel
Page 1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tax Case Appeal Nos.607 to 610 of 2011
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.) These Tax Case Appeals have been filed by the appellant / Assessee challenging the order dated 04.10.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench ('the Tribunal', for brevity) respective I.T.A.Nos.185, 186,189 & 1294/Mds/2011 relating to respective Assessment Years 2005-06, 2007-08, 2007-08, 2006-07.
2.The above appeals were admitted on 7.12.2011 on the following substantial questions of law :
TCA.No.607 of 2011:-
“1.Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessing officer could make an addition on the basis of an impounded receipt, without any independent corroboration of the payment, in view of denial of receipt of money by the parties concerned?
2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in confirming the addition when the impounded receipts were never acted upon, but made out only Page 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tax Case Appeal Nos.607 to 610 of 2011 for obtaining a bank loan, without any other evidence to the contrary?
3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the difference between the sale price mentioned in the agreement and in the sale deed is to be taken as unaccounted, even though the agreement was in respect of land and building, and the sale deed was in respect of land alone, which was confirmed by the parties to the transaction?
4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in confirming the addition of Rs.9 lakhs based on the agreement for sale, without verifying either the bank from which the loan was taken or the buyer of the property?” TCA.No.608 of 2011:-
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was right in remitting the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer when the grounds of appeal filed by the Revenue was only on the ground that percentage of completion method as recognised by AS 11 ought to be followed in preference to project completion method and there were no factual disputes?Page 3/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tax Case Appeal Nos.607 to 610 of 2011 TCA.No.609 of 2011:-
“(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was right in treating the promissory note impounded during the survey as conclusive evidence, when the assessee and the borrower had both stated in their respective sworn statements that only an amount of Rs.42 lakhs was received as loan? And
(ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessing officer could make an addition on the basis of an impounded receipt without any independent corroboration of the payment and without examining the bank, contrary to the sworn statement that the document was created only for obtaining loan form the bank?
TCA.No.610 of 2011:-
“(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was right in upholding the additions made on the advance received towards construction work, when the assessee is following a completed contract method of accounting?
(ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was right in upholding the estimation of profits without considering the fact that the receipts pertained to incomplete contracts and the assessee is following Page 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tax Case Appeal Nos.607 to 610 of 2011 the completed contract method of accounting?
(iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was right in merely confirming the CIT (A)'s order ignoring the fact that the materials gathered during the survey cannon be treated as conclusive evidence without examining the parties to the transaction?
(iv) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of CIT(A) without adverting to the grounds raised by the appellant or applying its mind to the issue?
3.When the matters were taken up for consideration, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/assessee submitted that during the pendency of these tax case appeals, the assessee has filed the requisite Forms 1 and 2 under Section 4 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, which were accepted and Form 3 were issued to the assessee on 24.03.2021 by the Income Tax Department. The learned counsel has also filed a common memo to that effect.
4.The aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant / assessee has also been fairly conceded by the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent / Revenue.
Page 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tax Case Appeal Nos.607 to 610 of 2011
5.This court heard the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, as per which, the assessee has already availed the benefit conferred under the beneficial legislation viz., the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, enacted for resolution of disputed tax and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, which came into force with effect from 17.03.2020; and the declarations submitted by the assessee were also accepted and Form 3 was also issued to them by the Income Tax Department. In view of such development, it is unnecessary for this court to decide the substantial questions of law arisen in these tax case appeals.
6.Therefore, recording the submissions so made by the learned counsel on either side, these appeals stand disposed of, directing the department to process the application in accordance with the Act and communicate the decision to the assessee at the earliest. No costs.
[R.M.D,J.] [M.S.Q, J.]
08.08.2022
msr
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
Page 6/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tax Case Appeal Nos.607 to 610 of 2011
To
1. The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Erode
2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai “D” Bench, Chennai.
3.The Income Tax Officer,
Ward-II (2), Erode-1.
Page 7/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tax Case Appeal Nos.607 to 610 of 2011
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
msr
Tax Case Appeal Nos.607 to 610 of 2011
08.08.2022
Page 8/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis