Madras High Court
M/S Tyco Sanmar Ltd vs The Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 7 June, 2022
TCA.No.501 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.06.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
TCA.No.501 of 2014
M/s Tyco Sanmar Ltd.,
No.9, Cathedral Road,
Chennai - 600 086. ...
Appellant
Vs
The Assistant Commissioner of Income tax,
Company Circle - III (2),
Chennai 600 034. ...
Respondent
Appeals preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai “B” Bench,
dated 13.03.2014 in I.TA.No.1255/Mds/2013.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Venkatanarayanan
for Mr.Subbaraya Iyer
For Respondent : Mr.M.Swaminathan,
Senior Standing Counsel
Mrs. V.Pushpa,
Standing Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/4
TCA.No.501 of 2014
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.)
This is an appeal filed by the assessee, challenging the order dated
13.03.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench,
in I.TA.No.1255/Mds/2013, relating to the assessment year 2006-07. The
operative portion of the Tribunal is quoted below for ready reference:
"In view thereof, we also deem it proper to restore this issue back to
the file of the Assessing officer who shall verify as to whether actual payment
has been effected either in relevant previous year or before due date of filing
of 'return'. Needless to say, he shall do so after giving adequate opportunity
of hearing to the assessee".
2. On 13.08.2014, this court admitted the aforesaid tax case appeal on
the following substantial question of law:
“Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the
Tribunal was right in holding that the provision of Rs.24,44,329/- made by
the assessee towards the approved gratuity fund with LIC of India and
approved by the Commissioner of Income Tax is not an allowable deduction
under section 40 (A)(7)(b) of the Act?"
3. Today, when the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned
counsel appearing for both sides jointly submitted that pursuant to the order of
remand, which is impugned herein, the assessing officer passed the fresh
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TCA.No.501 of 2014
assessment order, which was challenged by the assessee before the CIT(A).
Thereafter, the assessee went on further appeal in ITA.No.2680/Chny/2017
before the ITAT, which, by order dated 27.11.2019, allowed the said appeal, in
the following terms:
"4. In reply, the learned Departmental Representative vehemently
supported the order of the learned Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A).
5. We have considered the rival submission and perused the
materials available on record.
6. As it is noticed, the issue is now squarely covered by the decision
of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee's own case for
immediately succeeding assessment year as extracted above, respectfully
following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the
assessee's own case referred to supra, the Assessing Officer is directed to
grant the assessee the benefit of deduction under section 40A(7)(b) of the
income Tax Act, 1961 of the provision for gratuity to the Approved Gratuity
Fund maintained with the Life Insurance Corporation of India.
7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed."
Thus, according to the learned counsel, nothing survives for further
adjudication in this appeal.
4. Recording the submissions so made on both sides, this tax case
appeal stands disposed of, leaving the substantial question of law open.
No costs.
(R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q.,
J.)
07.06.2022
Index : yes/no
Internet : yes/no
av
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TCA.No.501 of 2014
R. MAHADEVAN, J
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J
av
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai “B” Bench.
2. The Assistant Commissioner of Income tax,
Company Circle - III (2),
Chennai 600 034.
3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),
Trichy.
TCA.No.501 of 2014
07.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
