Madras HC Dismisses Tax Appeals as Infructuous After Tribunal Disposed Main Appeals

CIT Vs Vellore Institute of Technology (Madras High Court)

The Revenue filed appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 challenging a common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai ‘B’ Bench, relating to the assessment years 2002-03 to 2004-05. The appeals raised two substantial questions of law. The first questioned whether the Tribunal was correct in extending an interim stay beyond the statutory period of 365 days prescribed under the third proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Act. The second questioned whether the Tribunal was justified in taking up the appeals for hearing when the main issue was pending before the Special Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at Hyderabad. During the hearing before the High Court, the Revenue submitted that the main appeals had already been disposed of by the Tribunal and, therefore, the tax case appeals were not pressed. The High Court recorded this submission and observed that, in view of the subsequent development during the pendency of the appeals, the need to decide the substantial questions of law no longer survived, as the issues had become academic. Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the tax case appeals as infructuous and left the substantial questions of law open. No order as to costs was passed.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue and Ms.J.Srividhya, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

2. These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) are directed against the common order dated3.2015 made in S.P.Nos.119 to 121 and MP.Nos.22 to 24/ Mds/2015 in S.P.Nos.459 to 461/Mds/2014 respectively in ITA.Nos.294 to 296/Mds/2014 and ITA.Nos.294 to 296/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai ‘B’ Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment years 2002-03 to 2004-05.

3. The appeal substantial questions of law :

“TCA.Nos.192 to 194 of 2016 :

“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in extending the interim order of stay beyond statutory period of 365 days as prescribed under Third Proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act ?” And

TCA.Nos.195 to 197 of 2016 :

“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in taking up the case for hearing when the main issue is pending before the Special Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at Hyderabad ?”

4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue submits that the main appeals themselves had already been disposed of by the Tribunal and hence, these appeals filed by the Revenue are not pressed.

5. The said submission of the learned Senior Standing Counsel is recorded.

6. In view of the subsequent development, which took place during the pendency of these appeals, the necessity to decide the substantial questions of law framed for consideration would not arise, as the issues have become academic.

7. Accordingly, the above tax case appeals are dismissed as infructuous and the substantial questions of law are left open. No costs.