Commissioner Of Income Tax Chennai v. M/S.tvs Electronics Ltd., "Jayalakshmi Estates"

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 13.12.2021 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVANANDTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A. NO. 660 OF 2010 Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai. .. Appellant Versus M/s.TVS Electronics Ltd., "Jayalakshmi Estates", 29, Haddows Road, Chennai. ... Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Chennai “C” Bench, dated 30.10.2009 in I.TA.No.226/Mds/2009. Against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-III, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600034 dated31.10.2008 ITA.No.462/07-08/A-III, PAN. for theAssessment year 2002-2003 and against the order of theAssistant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle III(2),Chennaidated31.12.2007P.A.No./G.I.R.No.AAACT2957NWard/Circle/Range, Company Circle-III(2), Chennai-34. Status-Company for the Assessment Year 2002-2003. For Appellant : Ms.V. Pushpa, Standing Counsel for ITFor Respondent: Mr.Subbaraya Iyer This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant /Revenue, challenging the order dated 30.10.2009 passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench, inI.T.A.No.226/Mds/2009, relating to the assessment year 2002-03. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. By order dated 20.08.2010, this court admitted theaforesaid tax case appeal on the following substantial questionof law: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in holding interest underSection 234 D is leviable only from assessment year2004-05. 3. Today, when the matter was taken up for consideration,the learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue as well as therespondent/assessee jointly submitted that the substantialquestion of law raised herein has already been considered anddecided by this Court in favour of the Revenue by judgment dated19.03.2019 in the assessee's own case in TCA.Nos.1457 and 1458of 2008, the relevant passage of which, is usefully extractedhereunder: "5.On the Second Question of Levy of Interestunder section 234D of the Act on the excess refundmade to the Assessee along with the Assessmentintimation sent to him under section 143(1) of theAct, the learned senior standing counsel for theRevenue drew our attention to a judgment of thiscourt in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v.Fisher Sanmar Ltd, (2014) 361 ITR 296 (Mad), wherein,a Division Bench of this Court held that if theregular assessment of the Assessee is made after theamendment of provisions of Section 234D of the Actw.e.f. 01.06.2003, then, the provisions of Section234D for levy of interest on the excess refund amountwould become applicable, even though the assessmentperiod may be prior to the said date of amendment.” “9. As for the Question of Levy of Interestunder Section 234D of the Act, though computation ofinterest will depend upon the appeal effect order tobe passed, the quantum of net payment is to bedetermined accordingly, after allowing weighteddeduction under Section 35 (2AB) of the Act, asindicated above. The provisions of Section 234D ofthe Act have been held applicable for Assessment Year2003-2004 in question in terms of the decision of theCo-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of FisherSanmar Ltd., cited supra. Accordingly, Questions ofLaw Nos.3 and 4 are answered in favour of the Revenueand against the Assessee. 10. Appeals of the Revenue are allowed in part,as above. No costs." 4.Following the above decision, the question of law raisedin this appeal is answered in favour of the revenue and againstthe assessee. Accordingly, this Tax Case Appeal is allowed. Nocosts. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar av/rsh To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai “C” Bench, 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal III, Chennai-34. 10. Appeals of the Revenue are allowed in part,as above. No costs." 4.Following the above decision, the question of law raisedin this appeal is answered in favour of the revenue and againstthe assessee. Accordingly, this Tax Case Appeal is allowed. Nocosts. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar av/rsh To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai “C” Bench, 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal III, Chennai-34. 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle III (2), Chennai +1cc to Mr.Subbaraya Iyer, Advocate, S.R.No.66509+1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate, S.R.No.66511 T.C.A.No.660 of 2010 AD(CO)PM/20/01/2022