L.Sivanandan v. The Income-tax Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, Chennai / The Union of India, New Delhi / The CIT, Cochin / The ACIT, Investigation Circle-I, Ernakulam
[Citation -2020-LL-1014-66]
| Citation | 2020-LL-1014-66 |
|---|---|
| Appellant Name | L.Sivanandan |
| Respondent Name | The Income-tax Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, Chennai / The Union of India, New Delhi / The CIT, Cochin / The ACIT, Investigation Circle-I, Ernakulam |
| Court | HIGH COURT OF MADRAS |
| Relevant Act | Income-tax |
| Date of Order | 14/10/2020 |
| Assessment Year | 1987-88, 1988-89, 1991-92, 1992-93, 1993-94 |
| Judgment | View Judgment |
| Keyword Tags | remand order • tax payable |
| Bot Summary: | For Petitioner : Mr. K.A.Parthasarathi for Mr. N.Inbarajan For Respondents : Mrs. Hema Muralikrishnan ORDER Heard Mr. K.A.Parthasarathi, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mrs. Hema Muralikrishnan, Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondents, and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties. The Writ Petition challenges the order No. 13/CHN/47/94-IT dated 23.03.2004 passed by the First Respondent viz. The Income Tax Settlement Commission Additional Bench, Chennai, in respect of the assessment of income tax payable for the Petitioner for the period from 1987-1988, 1988-1989, 1991-1992 to 1993-1994. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court that in respect of similarly placed persons, the Division Bench of this Court in Sultan Pillai Sons -vs- The Income Tax Settlement Commission and others that order dated 04.03.2020 in W.P. No. 28758 of 2004 has held as follows:- 4. Since apparently the impugned order has been passed in pursuance of the remand order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court itself, if there is any subsequent development or law or change of position of law at the hands of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is open to the Assessee to move the Settlement Commission itself for applying the correct position of law. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner would be satisfied if the same benefit is extended to him in this case. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions made, though this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order at this stage, it is made clear that the Petitioner is not precluded from moving the Settlement Commission by appropriate proceedings for applying the correct position of law in respect of the assessment of tax of the Petitioner for the relevant years. |