Madras High Court
M/S.Tidel Park Ltd vs The Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 15 July, 2021
Tax Case Appeal No.870 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
Tax Case Appeal No.870 of 2017
M/s.Tidel Park Ltd.,
4, Rajiv Gandhi Salai,
Taramani,
Chennai – 600 113. ... Appellant
Vs.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Circle – III (2),
now Corporate Circle – 3(1),
Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras
"D" Bench, dated 19.02.2016 passed in I.T.A.No.1404/Mds/2014.
For Appellant : Mr.Vikram Vijayaraghavan
for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan
For Respondent : Mrs.V.Pushpa
Standing Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 1/6
Tax Case Appeal No.870 of 2017
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 19.02.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras
"D" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.1404/Mds/2014 for
the assessment year 2006-07. The appellant/assessee has raised the
following substantial questions of law in the above appeal:
“1.Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding
that the assessee is not entitled to deduction u/s.80IA in
respect of interest income and other income which are
directly related to the business of Software Technology
Park?
2.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Tribunal was right in law in restricting the claim
of deduction u/s.80IA when the entire income was derived
only from developing, running and maintaining of Software
Technology Park (STP) which was approved by the
Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion and notified
by the Central Board of Direct Taxes in terms of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 2/6
Tax Case Appeal No.870 of 2017
Sec.80IA(4)(iii) of the Act r/w. Rule 18C of the IT Rules
and hence no part of the same can be excluded while
computing the relief under Section 80IA?
3.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case
the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is
not entitled to exclusion of expenditure in respect of
income which does not form part of the eligible profit for
deduction under Section 80IA?”
2. We have heard Mr.Vikram Vijayaraghavan for M/s.Subbaraya
Aiyar Padmanabhan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/
assessee and Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 3/6
Tax Case Appeal No.870 of 2017
17th March 2020.
4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/
assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form-3 on
29.04.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of
this Court to withdraw the appeal.
5. In the light of the fact that the assessee has already availed the
benefit under the Act, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the
appeal pending. At the same time, the interest of the assessee in the event
the order to be passed by the Department under the Act is not in favour
of the assessee, is to be safeguarded. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal
stands dismissed as withdrawn on the ground that the assessee has
already been issued with Form-3 and the Department shall process the
application at the earliest in accordance with the said Act and
communicate the decision to the assessee at the earliest. As observed, the
assessee is given liberty to restore the 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 4/6
Tax Case Appeal No.870 of 2017
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 Division Bench for orders.
6. With this observation, these Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed
as withdrawn with the aforementioned liberty, and consequently, the
Substantial Questions of Law are left open. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
15.07.2021
(2/3)
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
mkn
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Cirlce – III (2),
now Corporate Circle – 3(1), Chennai – 600 034.
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 5/6
Tax Case Appeal No.870 of 2017
and
R. HEMALATHA, J.
mkn
Tax Case Appeal No.870 of 2017
15.07.2021
(2/3)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 6/6
