M/S.tidel Park Ltd v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Company Range – Iii(2), Now Corporate Circle – 3(2), Chennai – 600 034

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 13.07.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA Tax Case Appeal No.336 of 2016 M/s.Tidel Park Ltd.,4, Canal Bank Road,Taramani,Chennai – 600 113. ...Appellant /AppellantVs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Company Range – III(2),now Corporate Circle – 3(2),Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondent/Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras "C" Bench, dated 26.08.2015 passed inI.T.A.No.49/Mds/2015 and against the order of the Commissionerof Income Tax (Appeals)-III, Chennai-34, dated 20/10/2014 madein ITA.No. 1867/2013-14-CIT(A)-III, and against the order ofthe Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle – III–(2),Chennai34dated18/03/2013madeinGIR.No/PAN. for the Assessment Year 2010-2011. For Appellant : Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan For Respondent : Mr.M.Swaminathan Senior Standing Counsel This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directedagainst the order dated 26.08.2015 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench, ('the Tribunal' forbrevity) in I.T.A.No.49/Mds/2015 for the assessment year2010-11. The above appeal has been admitted on the followingsubstantial questions of law : https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/“1.Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is not entitled todeduction u/s.80IA in respect of interest income andother income which are directly related to thebusiness of Software Technology Park? 2.Whether on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal was right in law inrestricting the claim of deduction u/s.80IA when theentire income was derived only from developing,running and maintaining of Software Technology Park(STP) which was approved by the Department ofIndustrial Policy & Promotion and notified by theCentral Board of Direct Taxes in terms of Sec.80IA(4)(iii) of the Act r/w. Rule 18C of the IT Rulesand hence no part of the same can be excluded whilecomputing the relief under Section 80IA?” 2. We have heard Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.SubbarayaAiyar Padmanabhan, learned counsel appearing for theappellant/ assessee and Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned SeniorStanding Counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 3. 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. 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for theappellant/ assessee that the assessee had already been issuedwith Form-3 on 29.04.2021 and the learned counsel for theappellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw theappeal. 3. 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. 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for theappellant/ assessee that the assessee had already been issuedwith Form-3 on 29.04.2021 and the learned counsel for theappellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw theappeal. 5. In the light of the fact that the assessee has alreadyavailed the benefit under the Act, no useful purpose would beserved in keeping the appeal pending. At the same time, theinterest of the assessee in the event the order to be passedby the Department under the Act is not in favour of theassessee, is to be safeguarded. Accordingly, the Tax CaseAppeal stands dismissed as withdrawn on the ground that theassessee has already been issued with Form-3 and theDepartment shall process the application at the earliest inaccordance with the said Act and communicate the decision tothe assessee at the earliest. As observed, the assessee isgiven liberty to restore the appeal in the event the ultimatedecision to be taken on the declaration filed by the assesseeunder Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of theassessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shallentertain the prayer without insisting upon any application tobe filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appealhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/and on such request made by the assessee by filing a Miscellaneous Petition for Restoration, the Registry shallplace such petition before the Division Bench for orders. 6. With this observation, these Tax Case Appeal standsdismissed as withdrawn with the aforementioned liberty, andconsequently, the Substantial Questions of Law are left open.No costs. Sd/-Assistant Registrar (CS-II)//True Copy//Sub Assistant Registrar mknTo1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals – III, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai – 34.3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Range – III(2), now Corporate Circle – 3(2), Chennai – 600 034.Copy ToThe Sub Assistant Registrar,AE (Main), Section,High Court, Madras.+1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate, S.R.No. 32771 Tax Case Appeal No.336 of 2016 CA(CO)GN(10/08/2021)