Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Renault India Private Ltd on 5 January, 2021
TCA.No.697 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.01.2021
CORAM :
The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
The Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA
Tax Case Appeal No.697 of 2018
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ...Appellant
Vs
M/s.Renault India Private Ltd.,
No.37&38, ASV Ramana Towers,
4th Floor, Venkatanarayana Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.
PAN: AADCR2042M ...Respondent
APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the
order dated 30.01.2018 made in ITA.No.1078/Mds/2017 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench for the assessment year
2012-13.
For Appellant: Mrs.Hemalatha
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent: Mr.N.V.Balaji
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.697 of 2018
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J)
This appeal has been filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) challenging the order dated
30.01.2018 made in ITA.No.1078/Mds/2017 on the file of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench ('the Tribunal' for brevity) for the
assessment year 2012-13.
2. The appeal was admitted on 19.11.2018 on the following
substantial questions of law:
“1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in
holding that the purchase of cars by the Assessee
from Nissan Automotive India Pvt Ltd would not
come within the meaning of International
Transaction and is not eligible to Arms length
pricing analysis and adjustment thereof?
2. Whether the Tribunal was right in
holding that the expenditure incurred on
advertisement/market promotion activity will not
amount to international transaction since the
Assessee has incurred such expenditure to create
market share for its cars and marginal benefit
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.697 of 2018
derived by its Principal Abroad as offshoot cannot
be converted into an international transaction?"
3. We have heard Mrs.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel
appearing for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.N.V.Balaji, learned counsel
appearing for the respondent.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/
assessee submits that the respondent/assessee has already filed the
declaration/undertaking under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.697 of 2018
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.
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.)
05.01.2021
Index: Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking Judgment/Non speaking Judgment
hvk
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.697 of 2018
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai 'D' Bench.
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.697 of 2018
T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J
AND
R.N.MANJULA,J
hvk
TCA.No.697 of 2018
05.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
