Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Corporate Circle – 2(2)Chennai – 600 034 v. M/S.il & Fs Tamil Nadu Power Company Ltd.new

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12.11.2024 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMARAND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN T.C.A.No.217 of 2024 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle – 2(2)Chennai – 600 034...Appellant Vs. M/s.IL & FS Tamil Nadu Power Company Ltd.New No.2, (Old No.21)4[th] Floor, KPR Tower1[st] Street, Subba Rao AvenueCollege Road, Chennai – 600 006.PAN: AABCF 1176A..Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench,Chennai,dated03.08.2022passedin I.T.A.No.2018/CHNY/2019.For the Appellant:Mrs.R.HemalathaSenior Standing Counsel For the Respondent:Mr.Joseph Prabakar JUDGMENT(Order of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)The present tax case appeal was admitted on 04.10.2024 on the following substantial questions of law:- "i. In the facts and circumstances of the case and https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis in law, whether the Ld.ITAT had committed an error in applying the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M/s.CIT Vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd., 236 ITR 315 (SC) to the case of the assessee where the facts are completely different? ii. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Ld.ITAT had committed an error in applying the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M/s.CIT Vs.Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills, [2000] 243 ITR 2 to the case of the assessee where the facts are completely different? iii. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Ld.ITAT had committed an error in holding the interest earned by the assessee as capital receipts instead of "income from other sources" as the deposits from which interest was earned was sourced from borrowed funds? iv. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Ld.ITAT had committed an error in not applying the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172 (SC) which is squarely applicable to the case? v. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Ld.ITAT had committed an error in applying the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd., [2017] 80 taxmann.com 221 and Redington (India) Ltd., Vs. Addl. CIT, [2017] 77 taxmann.com 257 to the case of the assessee ignoring the amendment brought in by Finance Act, 2022 in Section 14A by way of insertion of an explanation? vi. Whether the amendment made to Section 14A by Finance Act, 2022 by way of insertion of explanation is applicable retrospectively as it is only clarificatory in nature?" 2. It is submitted by the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant Revenue that this matter is covered under the Low Tax Effect as per the recent Circular dated 17.09.2024, in Circular No.9/2024. 3. Hence, this appeal stands dismissed, as covered under the low tax effect and the substantial questions of law raised in this appeal are kept open to be decided at the later point of time. There shall be no order as to costs. (R.S.K., J.) (C.S.N, J) 12.11.2024 Neutral Citation:Yes/No drm https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.217 of 2024 R. SURESH KUMAR, J.ANDC. SARAVANAN, J.(drm) T.C.A.No.217 of 2024 12.11.2024