M/S.inchcape Shipping Services Ssc Private Limited, Block v. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle - 6(1), Chennai - 600 034

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25.01.2021 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMANDTHE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA M/s.Inchcape Shipping Services SSCPrivate Limited,Block No.3, A3 and A4 Basement to 10,North Phase Olympia National Tower,Guindy Industrial Estate,Chennai - 600 032.(amended suo motu by us vide order dated 25.01.2021)...AppellantVs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax,Corporate Circle - 6(1),Chennai - 600 034....Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 28.04.2017 made in ITA.No.3404/Mds/2016 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennaifor the assessment year 2012-13. Against the Order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income TaxCorporate Circle 6(1), Chennai-34, dated 25.10.2016 and made inPAN AALCS8600A for the Assessment year 2012-13. For Appellant: Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J) This appeal has been filed by the assessee under Section260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity)challengingtheorderdated28.04.2017madeinITA.No.3404/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity) forthe assessment year 2012-13. 2. The appeal was admitted on 15.11.2018 on the followingsubstantial questions of law:"1. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal haserred in holding that for the purpose ofSection 92C of the Income Tax Act read withSub-Rule (1) of Rule 10B of the Income TaxRules, while making the selection ofcomparables, the turnover filter is not arelevant criterian for selection andaccordingly erred in not excluding suchcomparables? 2. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in including certain comparables andexcluding certain comparables for thepurpose of Section 92C of the Income Tax Actread with Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 10B of theIncome Tax Rules without appreciating thefact that the aforesaid comparablesmaterially affect the profitability of theappellant company? and3. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in disallowing depreciation adjustmentcharged in excess of Schedule IV of theCompanies Act and unutilized capacityadjustment, which were required to be madein order to make the assessee companycomparable as per Section 92C of the IncomeTax Act read with Rule 10B(3)?" 3. We have heard Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan, learned counselappearing on behalf for the appellant/assessee andMr.J.Narayanaswamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearingfor the respondent/Revenue. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant/assessee submitsthat the assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme andappellant/assessee has already filed the declaration/undertakingon 29.12.2020 and is awaiting orders to be passed in Form No.3. 5. In the light of the subsequent event, the CompetentAuthority shall process the application/declaration inaccordance with the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3of 2020) and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously aspossible. The assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on thedeclaration filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the saidAct is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made,the Registry shall entertain the prayer without insisting uponany application to be filed for condonation of delay inrestoration of the appeal and on such request made by theassessee by filing a miscellaneous petition for restoration, theRegistry shall place such petition before the appropriateDivision Bench for orders. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on thedeclaration filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the saidAct is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made,the Registry shall entertain the prayer without insisting uponany application to be filed for condonation of delay inrestoration of the appeal and on such request made by theassessee by filing a miscellaneous petition for restoration, theRegistry shall place such petition before the appropriateDivision Bench for orders. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant has brought to thenotice of this Court that since the assessee's name has beenchanged to M/s.Inchcape Shipping Services SSC Private Limited,Form-1 and Form-2 declarations have been filed in the said nameand prayed that the cause title in the present appeal has to beamended. 7. Though the assessee has not filed a separate applicationfor amending the cause title, since we are inclined to disposeof the appeal on account of the fact that the assessee has optedfor Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, we direct the cause title to beamended. Office to carry out necessary amendment before issuingorder copies. 8. The tax case appeal stands disposed of with theaforementioned liberty and consequently, the substantialquestions of law framed are left open. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IX) //True Copy// hvk Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai. 2. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle - 6(1), Chennai - 600 034. +1cc to Mr.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan, Advocate, S.R.No.4541 MP(CO)CS/01/04/2021 TCA.No.530 of 2018