Madras High Court
M/S.Eid Parry (India) Limited vs The Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 24 February, 2021
Tax Case Appeal No.208 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.02.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI
Tax Case Appeal No.208 of 2012
M/s.EID Parry (India) Limited,
'Dare House',
#234, NSC Bose Road,
Chennai – 600 001. ... Appellant
Vs.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Large Taxpayer Unit,
Chennai. ... 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 02.08.2011 passed in I.T.A.No.415/Mds/2010.
For Appellant : Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar
For Respondent : Mr.T.Ravikumar
Senior Standing Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 1/5
Tax Case Appeal No.208 of 2012
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 02.08.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai
"B" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.415/Mds/2010 for the
assessment year 2004-2005. The above appeal has been admitted on
13.08.2012 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 law in holding
that interest receipt on bank deposits cannot constitute
business income for the purpose of computing deduction
under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961?
2.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding
that contribution made to Employees Recreation & Sports
Club is not an allowable deduction under Section 40A(9) of
Income Tax Act, 1961?
3.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in
upholding the computation of Long Term Capital Gains by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 2/5
Tax Case Appeal No.208 of 2012
replacing the Fair Market Value as on 01.04.1981 adopted
by the Appellant based on the report of an independent
valuer with the guideline value provided by the Sub
Registrar?”
2. We have heard Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar, learned counsel for the
appellant/assessee and Mr.T.Ravikumar, 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
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 3/5
Tax Case Appeal No.208 of 2012
4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/
assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form-3 on
03.02.2021 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.] [T.V.T.S., J.]
Index : Yes/No 24.02.2021
Internet : Yes (1/2)
mkn
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai "B" Bench
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Large Taxpayer Unit,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 4/5
Tax Case Appeal No.208 of 2012
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
mkn
Tax Case Appeal No.208 of 2012
24.02.2021
(1/2)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 5/5
