Madras High Court
Principal Commissioner Of Income ... vs M/S.Tvh Energy Resources Pvt. Ltd on 23 February, 2021
T.C.A.No.465 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
T.C.A.No.465 of 2019
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
Central 1,
No.108, Nungambakkam High Road,
Chennai-600 034. .. Appellant/Respondent
-vs-
M/s.TVH Energy Resources Pvt. Ltd.,
No.16/17, 3rd Cross Street,
TVH Novella, RA Puram, Chennai-600 028.
PAN: AAC CT 8802 G .. Respondent/Appellant
Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the
order dated 08.11.2018, made in I.T.A.No.3183/Chny/2017 on the file of
the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai for the assessment
year 2012-13.
For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar,
Senior Standing Counsel
assisted by Ms.K.G.Usha Rani,
Junior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.G.Baskar
1/6
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.465 of 2019
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.)
This appeal by the Revenue, filed under Section 260A of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), is directed against the
order dated 08.11.2018, made in I.T.A.No.3183/Chny/2017 passed the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai (for brevity “the
Tribunal”) for the assessment year 2012-13.
2.The appeal was admitted on 16.07.2019, on the following
substantial questions of law:-
“i. Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in deleting
the enhancement of addition by the CIT(A) on account of
the assessee diverting interest bearing funds to its sister
concern without charging interest by holding that only if
interest bearing funds are deployed outside the business of
the assessee without recovering interest, such additions can
be made without giving any finding as to the business
purpose of the assessee in diverting such interest bearing
funds?
ii. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the
case and in law, the Tribunal was legally justified in not
appreciating the principle laid down in the case of CIT vs.
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.465 of 2019
Abhishek Industries Ltd., [reported in 286 ITR 1 (P&H)]
while deleting the interest disallowance?
iii. Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in
deleting the addition of Rs.7,60,22,100/- made under Section
69C of the Act without following its earlier decision in the
assessee's own case for the earlier assessment year 2011-12
wherein the case was remitted back to the Assessing Officer
for re-adjudication? and
iv. Whether the Tribunal was legally right in not
appreciating the ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's
decision in the case of Radhasoami Satsung vs. CIT
[reported in 193 ITR 321] to the effect that where a
fundamental aspect permeating through the different
assessment years has been found as a fact one way or the
other and parties have allowed that position to be sustained
by not challenging the order, it would not be at all
appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a
subsequent year?”
3.Heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel
assisted by Ms.K.G.Usha Rani, learned Junior Standing Counsel for the
appellant/Revenue and Mr.G.Baskar, learned counsel for the
respondent/assessee.
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.465 of 2019
4.It may not be necessary for this Court to examine the factual
position, in the light of the subsequent development. After the appeal was
disposed of by the Tribunal by the impugned order dated 08.11.2018, the
Revenue filed miscellaneous petition in M.P.No.94/Chny/2019 before the
Tribunal on the ground that the figures adopted by the Tribunal in respect of
share capital were incorrect and thereby, the working of non-interest bearing
funds is also incorrect. Pointing out the above, the Revenue prayed for
fresh adjudication of the matter.
5.The Tribunal heard the Revenue as well as the assessee and by
order dated 30.08.2019, allowed the miscellaneous petition filed by the
Revenue and remitted the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer
with specific observations. The operative portion of the order reads as
follows:-
“6.Admittedly, the assessee has advanced only
Rs.74,59,89,006/-. The assessee had non-interest bearing
funds of Rs.70.18 crores, which includes share capital at
Rs.52.10 crores and reserves & surplus of Rs.18.08 crores.
By filing detailed written submissions by the ld. Counsel for
the assessee, both parties have duly agreed that the interest
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.465 of 2019
bearing fund advanced to sister concern was only Rs.4.41
crores [74.59 crores - 70.18 crores]. Accordingly, interest
disallowance has to be made on the amount of Rs.4.41
crores. Thus, we remit the matter back to the file of the
Assessing Officer to determine the interest only.
Accordingly, the order of the Tribunal stands rectified.”
6.We are informed by Mr.G.Baskar, learned counsel for the assessee
that the assessee has accepted the order passed by the Tribunal dated
30.08.2019, and the assessee has not preferred any appeal.
7.In the light of the above, there would not be any necessity to answer
the substantial questions of law framed for consideration in this appeal.
8.Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of and the substantial
questions of law are left. No costs.
(T.S.S., J.) (R.N.M., J.)
23.02.2021
Index: Yes/ No
Speaking Order : Yes/ No
abr
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.465 of 2019
T.S.Sivagnanam, J.
and
R.N.Manjula, J.
(abr)
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai.
T.C.A.No.465 of 2019
23.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
