Madras High Court
M/S.Icici Bank Limited vs The Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 18 October, 2022
Tax Case Appeal Nos.1385 to 1387 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.10.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
T.C.A.Nos.1385 to 1387 of 2010
M/s.ICICI Bank Limited
(Erstwhile Bank of Madura Ltd)
ICICI Bank Towers
93, Santhome High Road,
Chennai 600 028. .. Appellant in all T.C.A.'s
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner of Incometax,
Company Circle (2),
Chennai- 600 034. .. Respondent in all T.C.A.'s
Prayer: Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai
dated 06.06.2008 passed in I.T.A.No.3400/Mds/2004, I.T.A.No.3403/Mds/2004
and I.T.A.No.3404/Mds/2004 respectively.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan
for Ms.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabha
(in all W.A.'s)
For Respondent : Mr.T.Ravikumar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (in all W.A.'s) Standing Counsel
Page 1/4
Tax Case Appeal Nos.1385 to 1387 of 2010
COMMON JUDGMENT
S.VAIDYANATHAN,J
and
C.SARAVANAN, J
These Appeals have been preferred against the order of the Income
Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai dated 06.06.2008 passed in
I.T.A.No.3400/Mds/2004, I.T.A.No.3403/Mds/2004 and
I.T.A.No.3404/Mds/2004 respectively.
2. This Court by an order dated 25.11.2011 admitted this Appeal on
the following substantial questions of law :-
"1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was right in not admitting the fresh
ground of appeal relating to levy of interest u/s.234D?
2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal failed to appreciate that the additional
ground is purely a legal issue which can be decided on the
basis of facts available on record and erred in rejecting the
same ignoring the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court
in the case of National Thermal Power Co.Ltd.[229 ITR 383
(SC)]?
3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the
disallowance u/s.14A when the proviso debars the Assessing
Offier from taking any action under Section 147 in this
regard for any assessment year beginning on or before 1st
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
day of April 2001?
Page 2/4
Tax Case Appeal Nos.1385 to 1387 of 2010
3. From the records it is seen that the issue regarding Section 234 D or
Section 14 A of the Income Tax Act was not raised either before the Assessing
Officer or before the Appellate Commissioner and therefore the Tribunal has
rejected the Appeal raised by the Appellant on the question relating to the levy of
interest under Section 234D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Similarly,no issue was
flagged by the Appellant on the question of disallowance under Section 14 A of the
Act.
In view of the same, we find no merits in these Appeals. Accordingly, these
Appeals stands dismissed by answering the substantial question of law against the
Appellant and in favour of the Revenue. No costs.
[S.V.N., J.] [C.S.N., J.]
18.10.2022
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
arr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 3/4
Tax Case Appeal Nos.1385 to 1387 of 2010
S.VAIDYANATHAN, J.
and
C.SARAVANAN, J.
arr
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
Chennai 'D' Bench.
2. The Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax,
Central Circle II (1),
121, Nungambakkam High Road,
Chennai- 600 034.
T.C.A.Nos.1385 to 1387 of 2010
Dated : 18.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 4/4
