Ii. Whether, On The Facts Andcircumstances Of The Case And In Law, Thetribunal Was Legally Justified In Notappreciating The Principle Laid Down Inthe Case Of Ci v. Https://Hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/Hcservices

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA Tax Case Appeal No.466 of 2019 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central I, Chennai-34 ...AppellantVsM/s.TVH Energy Resources Pvt.Ltd., Chennai-28. ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the order dated 08.11.2018 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench, Chennai made inI.T.A.No.3117/Chny/ 2017 for the assessment year 2012-13 againstthe order dated 22/09/2019 passed by the Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeals) 18, Numgambakkam, Chennai-34 made in ITA No.39/15-16 for the assessment year 2012-2013 against the order dated31/03/2015 passed by the Deputes Commissioner of Income Tax,CentralCircle1(2),Nungambakkam,Chennai-34videPAN/GIP.No.AACC78802G for the assessment year 2012-2013. The appeal has been filed by the Revenue under Section 260Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) challengingthe order dated 08.11.2018 passed by the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'D' Bench, Chennai (for short, the Tribunal)made in I.T.A.No. 3117/Chny/2017 for the assessment year 2012-13. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The appeal was admitted on 16.7.2019 on the followingsubstantial questions of law: “i. Whether the Tribunal is correct inlaw in deleting the enhancement of additionby the CIT(A) on account of the assesseediverting interest bearing funds to itssister concern without charging interest byholding that only if interest bearing fundsare deployed outside the business of theassessee without recovering interest, suchadditions can be made without giving anyfinding as to the business purpose of theassessee in diverting such interest bearingfunds ? ii. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case and in law, theTribunal was legally justified in notappreciating the principle laid down inthe case of CIT Vs. Abhishek IndustriesLtd. [reported in 286 ITR 1 (P&H)] whiledeleting the interest disallowance ?iii. Whether the Tribunal was correctin law in deleting the addition ofRs.7,60,22,100/- made under Section 69C ofthe Act without following its earlierdecision in the assessee's own case for theearlier assessment year 2011-12 wherein thecase was remitted back to the AssessingOfficer for re-adjudication ? Andiv. Whether the Tribunal was legallyright in not appreciating the ratio of theHon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the caseof Radhasoami Satsung Vs. CIT [reported in193 ITR 321] to the effect that where afundamental aspect permeating through thedifferent assessment years has been found asa fact one way or the other and parties haveallowed that position to be sustained by notchallenging the order, it would not be atall appropriate to allow the position to bechanged in a subsequent year?” 3. We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned SeniorStanding Counsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned JuniorStanding Counsel appearing for the appellant/Revenue andMr.M.P.Senthilkumar, learned counsel appearing for therespondent/assessee. 4. Learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for theappellant/ Revenue seeks to withdraw the above appeal. He hasalso sent an email dated 19.1.2021 i.e today to that effect. 5. The email dated 19.1.2021 is recorded and shall formpart of this judgment. In view of the said email, the aboveappeal is dismissed as withdrawn. The substantial questions oflaw framed are left open. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar RS To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai.2. The Commissioner of Income Tax,(Appeals) 18,Nungambakkam,Chennai-34. 3. The Deputes Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle 1(2)Nungambakkam,Chennai-34. 4. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,Central-1, Chennai-34. 4. Learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for theappellant/ Revenue seeks to withdraw the above appeal. He hasalso sent an email dated 19.1.2021 i.e today to that effect. 5. The email dated 19.1.2021 is recorded and shall formpart of this judgment. In view of the said email, the aboveappeal is dismissed as withdrawn. The substantial questions oflaw framed are left open. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar RS To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai.2. The Commissioner of Income Tax,(Appeals) 18,Nungambakkam,Chennai-34. 3. The Deputes Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle 1(2)Nungambakkam,Chennai-34. 4. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,Central-1, Chennai-34. +1cc to Mr.G. BASKAR, Advocate, S.R.No.2383+1cc to Mr.TR. SENTHILKUMAR, Advocate, S.R.No.2440NRL(CO)SM (09/02/2021) TCA.No.466 of 2019