Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax Iii vs M/S.Rajkumar Impex Pvt. Ltd on 1 December, 2021
Tax Case Appeal No.905 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.12.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
T.C.A.No.905 of 2009
Commissioner of Income Tax III,
Chennai. ... Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Rajkumar Impex Pvt. Ltd.,
B 603, Keshav Dugar Apartments,
1, East Avenue,
Kessva Perumal Puram,
R.A.Puram, Chennai – 600 028. ...
Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai "B"
Bench, dated 09.04.2009 passed in I.T.A.No.199/Mds/2008.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan
for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar
Page 1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tax Case Appeal No.905 of 2009
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.)
This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue,
challenging the order dated 09.04.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal 'B' Bench Chennai ('the Tribunal', for brevity) in I.T.A.No.199
/Mds/2008 for the Assessment Year 2003-04.
2.The above appeal was admitted on 05.10.2009 on the following
substantial questions of law :
"1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding
that the assessee was entitled for deduction under section 80IA
on the disallowance made under section 40A(3) even though
such disallowance could not be considered as income 'derived'
from the eligible industrial undertaking, in the light of the
decisions of Supreme Court in Cambay Electric Supply
Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (113 ITR
84), Pandian Chemicals Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
(262 ITR 278) and Commissioner of Income - tax vs. Sterling
Foods (237 ITR 579)?
Page 2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tax Case Appeal No.905 of 2009
2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding
that while computing the deduction under Section 80HHC, the
deduction allowed under Section 80IA need not be reduced from
the business profits, ignoring the provisions of Section 80IA(9)?"
3.When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel
appearing for the respondent / assessee submitted that during the pendency
of this tax case appeal, the assessee has availed the benefit conferred under
the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and filed necessary declarations,
which were accepted and Form 5 / order for full and final settlement of tax
arrears, was also issued by the Income tax department, on 06.05.2021. The
learned counsel has also filed Form 5 dated 06.05.2021 to that effect.
4.The aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the
respondent/assessee has also been fairly conceded by the learned senior
standing counsel appearing for the appellant/ Revenue.
5.In view of the subsequent development, this court is of the opinion
Page 3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tax Case Appeal No.905 of 2009
that nothing survives for adjudication in this appeal. Recording the
submission so made by the learned counsel on either side, the Tax Case
Appeal stands disposed of. No costs.
((R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q., J.)
01.12.2021
av
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai 'B' Bench.
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax III,
Chennai.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income - Tax,
Company Circle V (3), Chennai.
Page 4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tax Case Appeal No.905 of 2009
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
av
T.C.A.No.905 of 2009
01.12.2021
Page 5/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
