M/S.oriental Hotels Limited,Paramount Plaza v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,Company Circle – V(1),Chennai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17.02.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI Tax Case Appeal No.238 of 2011 M/s.Oriental Hotels Limited,Paramount Plaza,47, M.G. Road,Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. ...Appellant /Appellant Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Company Circle – V(1),Chennai. ... Respondent/Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras "B" Bench, dated 21.01.2011 passed inI.T.A.No.2314/Mds/2007 and this appeal preferred against theorder of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) V, Chennai 34order dated 31.07.2007 made in ITA.No. 89/2006-2007 for theAssessment Year 2003-2004 and preferred against the order of theAssistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle – V (1),Chennai order dated 29.03.2006 made in PAN/GIR.No. /51001-0 for the Assessment Year 2003-2004. For Appellant : Mr.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directedagainst the order dated 21.01.2011 passed by the Income Tax https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Appellate Tribunal, Madras "B" Bench, ('the Tribunal' forbrevity) in I.T.A.No.2314/Mds/2007 for the assessment year2003-2004. The above appeal has been admitted on 01.08.2011 onthe following Substantial Questions of Law: "1.Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right inlaw in holding that the appellant is not entitled todeduction under Section 35D as hotel industry cannotbe regarded as an industrial undertaking withoutappreciating that hotel falls within the definitionof "industry"? 2.Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right inlaw in denying deduction under Section 35D when thesame has been allowed in the initial assessment year1995-96? 3.Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case the Tribunal was right in law in holdingthat interest income earned on deposits, loansadvanced to subsidiary companies and inter corporatedividends in the course of and for the purpose ofbusiness should be assessed as income from 'othersources' and not under the head profits and gains ofthe business and thereby excluded from the profits ofthe business for the purpose of computing deductionunder Section 80HHD? 4.Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case the Tribunal was right in law in holdingthat the amount received from British Airlinestowards settlement of the bills of stay of their crewshould not be included in the foreign exchangereceipts of the appellant for the purpose ofcomputation of deduction under Section 80HHD of theIncome Tax Act?" 2. We have heard Mr.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.SubbarayaAiyar, learned counsel for the appellant/ assessee andMr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for therespondent/Revenue. 3. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide theSubstantial Questions of Law framed for consideration on accountof certain subsequent developments. The Government of Indiaenacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of2020) to provide for resolution of disputed tax and for mattersconnected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act of theParliament received the assent of the President on 17[th] March2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17[th] March 2020. 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form – 3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ on 27.01.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seekspermission of this Court to withdraw the appeal.5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel forthe appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed aswithdrawn. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form – 3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ on 27.01.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seekspermission of this Court to withdraw the appeal.5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel forthe appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed aswithdrawn. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mknTo1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "B" Bench 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle – V(1), Chennai.3.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) V, Chennai.+1cc to Mr.Subbaraya Aiyar, Advocate, S.R.No. 9620+1cc to Mr.T.Ravikumar, Advocate, S.R.No. 9683Tax Case Appeal No.238 of 2011KJ(CO)GN(15/03/2021)