Madras High Court
M/S.Indus Finance Ltd vs The Deputy Commissioner Of on 23 February, 2021
TCA.No769 of 2018
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
Tax Case Appeal No.769 of 2018
M/s.Indus Finance Ltd.,
4th Floor, Kothari Building,
114, M.G.Road, Nungambakkam,
Chennai - 600 034. ...Appellant
Vs
The Deputy Commissioner of
Income Tax,
Corporate Circle - 2(2), Chennai. ...Respondent
APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the
order dated 03.05.2018 made in ITA.No.1348/Chny/2017 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year
2012-13.
For Appellant: Mr.A.S.Sriraman
For Respondent: Mr.R.Karthik Ranganathan
Senior Standing Counsel
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No769 of 2018
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J)
This appeal, filed by the assessee, is directed against the order
dated 03.05.2018 made in ITA.No.1348/Chny/2017 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for
brevity) for the assessment year 2012-13.
2. The appeal was admitted on 27.06.2019 on the following
substantial questions of law:
"i. Whether the annual accounts/financial
statements adopted under the Companies Act, 1956
could be altered/adjusted in making additions under
the books profits regime under Section 115JB of the
Act other than the permitted adjustments prescribed
therein by the Assessing Officer/respondent in
computing book profits for taxation under the Act?
ii. Whether the disclosure for charging higher
depreciation for book purposes under the Companies
Act, 1956 could be considered as adequate on the
plain reading of the annual report of the appellant
while overlooking the management's perspective of
charging higher rate of depreciation based on the
performance of the asset?
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No769 of 2018
iii. Whether the additional conditions on
disclosure in the circular issued could override the
prescription for the preparation of the financial
statements as per Section 205 read with Schedule XIV
of the Companies Act, 1956?
iv. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in
approving the addition of excess depreciation
quantified under Section 115JB of the Act despite the
acceptance of the right of the appellant/assessee under
the Companies Act, 1956 for charging different rate of
depreciation while compiling the financial statements
for the assessment year under consideration? and
v. Whether the interpretation of Section 43B(d) of
the Act is correct in the context of the interest payable
on the loan taken on the security of the key-man
insurance policies for considering the correctness of
the deduction claimed in relation thereto while such
charge of interest would fall within the ambit of
Section 37(1) of the Act?"
3. We have heard Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel for the
appellant and Mr.R.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel
appearing for the respondent-Revenue.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No769 of 2018
4. The learned counsel for the appellant-assessee submits that the
appellant-assessee has already filed the declaration/undertaking under the
Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme on 30.01.2021 and is awaiting orders to be
passed in Form No.3.
5. In the light of the subsequent event, the Competent Authority
shall process the application/declaration in accordance with the Direct Tax
Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) and pass appropriate orders as
expeditiously as possible. The assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal
in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration filed by the
assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If
such a prayer is made, the Registry shall entertain the prayer without
insisting upon any application to be filed for condonation of delay in
restoration of the appeal and on such request made by the assessee by filing
a miscellaneous petition for restoration, the Registry shall place such
petition before the appropriate Division Bench for orders.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No769 of 2018
6. The tax case appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned
liberty and consequently, the substantial questions of law framed are left
open. No costs.
(T.S.S.,J.) (R.N.M.,J.)
23.02.2021
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
hvk
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
'A' Bench, Chennai.
2. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Corporate Circle - 2(2),
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No769 of 2018
T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J
AND
R.N.MANJULA,J
hvk
TCA.No.769 of 2018
23.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
