Madras High Court
M/S.I.P.Rings Ltd vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income ... on 26 April, 2021
Tax Case Appeal No.317 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
Tax Case Appeal No.317 of 2015
M/s.I.P.Rings Ltd.,
Arjay Apex Centre,
No.24, College Road,
Chennai – 600 006. ... Appellant
Vs.
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Circle – II(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
"D" Bench, dated 26.09.2014 passed in I.T.A.No.729/Mds/2014.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan
for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan
For Respondent : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan
Senior Standing Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 1/6
Tax Case Appeal No.317 of 2015
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
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 26.09.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras
"D" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.729/Mds/2014 for the
assessment year 2008-09. The above appeal has been admitted on
22.07.2015 on the following Substantial Questions of Law:
"1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in upholding
the order of CIT (Appeals) treating 25% of the Royalty
payment made towards right to use the technical know-
how granted by the Non Resident as Capital in nature?
2.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Tribunal was right in treating 25% of the royalty
payment as capital expenditure under Section 32(1) when
the same is not owned by the appellant and tax was
deductible at source on the ground that payment was for
right to use and not for acquisition of intangible asset?
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 2/6
Tax Case Appeal No.317 of 2015
3.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the ratio of
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Southern Switchgears v. CIT 232 ITR 359 (SC) dealing
with the initial year of setting up of factory is applicable
to the facts of this case?
4.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in not following
the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
M/s.CIT Vs.IAEC Pumps Ltd. 232 ITR 316 and CIT Vs.
Panasonic Carbon India Ltd. (Mad) which is applicable to
the facts of the case ?”
2. We have heard Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.Subbaraya
Aiyar Padmanabhan, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and
Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the
respondent/Revenue.
3. 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 3/6
Tax Case Appeal No.317 of 2015
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.
4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/
assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form-3 on
20.04.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of
this Court to withdraw the appeal.
5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the
appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
26.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
mkn
To
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 4/6
Tax Case Appeal No.317 of 2015
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Circle – II(3),
Chennai – 600 034.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 5/6
Tax Case Appeal No.317 of 2015
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R. HEMALATHA, J.
mkn
Tax Case Appeal No.317 of 2015
26.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 6/6
