Madras High Court
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Il & Fs Tamil Nadu Power Company Ltd on 12 November, 2024
Author: R. Suresh Kumar
Bench: R. Suresh Kumar, C. Saravanan
T.C.A.No.217 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.11.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN
T.C.A.No.217 of 2024
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
Corporate Circle – 2(2)
Chennai – 600 034. .. Appellant
Vs.
M/s.IL & FS Tamil Nadu Power Company Ltd.
New No.2, (Old No.21)
4th Floor, KPR Tower
1st Street, Subba Rao Avenue
College Road, Chennai – 600 006.
PAN: AABCF 1176A .. Respondent
Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act,
1961, against the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A”
Bench, Chennai, dated 03.08.2022 passed in
I.T.A.No.2018/CHNY/2019.
For the Appellant : Mrs.R.Hemalatha
Senior Standing Counsel
For the Respondent : Mr.Joseph Prabakar
JUDGMENT
(Order of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)
The present tax case appeal was admitted on 04.10.2024 on
the following substantial questions of law:-
"i. In the facts and circumstances of the case and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
in law, whether the Ld.ITAT had committed an
error in applying the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in the case of M/s.CIT Vs.
Bokaro Steel Ltd., 236 ITR 315 (SC) to the case
of the assessee where the facts are completely
different?
ii. In the facts and circumstances of the case and
in law, whether the Ld.ITAT had committed an
error in applying the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in the case of M/s.CIT
Vs.Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills, [2000] 243
ITR 2 to the case of the assessee where the facts
are completely different?
iii. In the facts and circumstances of the case and
in law, whether the Ld.ITAT had committed an
error in holding the interest earned by the
assessee as capital receipts instead of "income
from other sources" as the deposits from which
interest was earned was sourced from borrowed
funds?
iv. In the facts and circumstances of the case and
in law, whether the Ld.ITAT had committed an
error in not applying the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in the case of Tuticorin
Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT [1997]
227 ITR 172 (SC) which is squarely applicable to
the case?
v. In the facts and circumstances of the case and
in law, whether the Ld.ITAT had committed an
error in applying the decision of the Hon'ble
Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs.
Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd., [2017] 80
taxmann.com 221 and Redington (India) Ltd., Vs.
Addl. CIT, [2017] 77 taxmann.com 257 to the
case of the assessee ignoring the amendment
brought in by Finance Act, 2022 in Section 14A
by way of insertion of an explanation?
vi. Whether the amendment made to Section 14A
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
by Finance Act, 2022 by way of insertion of
explanation is applicable retrospectively as it is
only clarificatory in nature?"
2. It is submitted by the learned Senior Standing Counsel
appearing for the appellant Revenue that this matter is covered
under the Low Tax Effect as per the recent Circular dated
17.09.2024, in Circular No.9/2024.
3. Hence, this appeal stands dismissed, as covered under the
low tax effect and the substantial questions of law raised in this
appeal are kept open to be decided at the later point of time.
There shall be no order as to costs.
(R.S.K., J.) (C.S.N, J)
12.11.2024
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
drm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R. SURESH KUMAR, J.
AND
C. SARAVANAN, J.
(drm)
12.11.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
