M/S.peirce Leslie Insurance Surveyors& Loss Assessors Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer,Corporate Ward 5(1),Chennai – 600 034

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21.04.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Tax Case Appeal No.796 of 2017 M/s.Peirce Leslie Insurance Surveyors& Loss Assessors Ltd.,No.37, P.V.Cherian Cresent,Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer,Corporate Ward 5(1),Chennai – 600 034.... Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, "B" SMC Bench, Chennai dated 18.09.2017 passed inI.T.A.No.1112/Mds/2017 preferred against the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 Chennai-34, dated31/01/2017 made in ITA No.159/2015-16/CIT(A)-3 preferredagainst the order of the Income Tax Officer Corporate Ward 5(1), Chennai dated 25/01/2016 made in PAN/GIR No.AACCP9765Efor the assessment year 2013-14. For Appellant : Mr.M.P.Senthil KumarFor Respondent : Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel The appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directedagainst the order dated 18.09.2017 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras "B" SMC Bench, Chennai ('theTribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.1112/Mds/ 2017 for theAssessment Year 2013-14. 2.The above appeal was admitted on the followingSubstantial Questions of Law for consideration: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ “1)Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income Tax AppellateTribunal was right in law in holding thatexpenditure incurred by the appellant towardspayment of Corporate and Secretarial Charges to itsHolding Company availing strategic and businessdevelopment advices and the development of pay-rolland e-TDS software was not allowable as revenueexpenditure u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 2)Is not the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal perverse in holding that appellant had notdischarged the onus to prove that the servicesrendered by the Holding Company helped its businessmerely on the ground that there was no agreementbetween the appellant and its Holding Company?” 3. We have heard Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar, learned counsel forthe appellant/assessee and Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, learned SeniorStanding Counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 4. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide theSubstantial Questions of Law framed for consideration onaccount of certain subsequent developments. The Government ofIndia enacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3of 2020) to provide for resolution of disputed tax and formatters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act ofthe Parliament received the assent of the President on 17[th]March 2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17[th] March2020. 5.We are informed by the learned counsel for theappellant/ assessee that the assessee has already been issuedwith Form – 3 on 09.12.2020. 6. In the light of the fact that the assessee has alreadyavailed the benefit under the Act, no useful purpose would beserved in keeping this appeal pending. At the same time,safeguarding the interest of the assessee in the event theorder to be passed by the Department under the Act is not infavour of the assessee. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal isdismissed on the ground that the assessee has already beenissued with Form - 3 and the Department shall process theapplications at the earliest in accordance with the said Actand communicate the decision to the assessee at the earliest.As observed, the assessee is given liberty to restore thisappeal 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 ismade, the Registry shall entertain the prayer withouthttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/insisting upon any application to be filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appeal and on such request made bythe assessee by filing a Miscellaneous Petition forRestoration, the Registry shall place such petition before theDivision Bench for orders. 7. With this observation, the Tax Case Appeal isdismissed with the aforementioned liberty and consequently,the Substantial Questions of Law are left open. No costs. Sd/-Assistant Registrar(CS-VI)//True copy//Sub Assistant RegistrarvaTo1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "B" SMC Bench, Chennai.2.The Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward 5(1), Chennai – 600 034.3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai-34.+1cc to Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, Advocate SR.No.24204+1cc to Mr.G.Baskar, Advocate SR.No.24479Tax Case Appeal No.796 of 2017 CP(CO)GMY(04/06/2021)