Tca v. Sutherland Global Services Inc
High Court
12 Jun 2025 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court Β· hc_cis_mas
Parties
Tca v. Sutherland Global Services Inc
Date of order
12 Jun 2025
Assessment year(s)
β
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Tca v. Sutherland Global Services Inc, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Accordingly, the instant appeals are dismissed for the reasons stated in our judgment dated 10.06.2025 made in TCA Nos.80, 81 and 82 of 2025.
Summary auto-generated from the order below β read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order β as passed by the High Court
T.C.A.Nos.92 and 94 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICEANDTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
T.C.A.Nos.92 and 94 of 2025
and CMP Nos.13239, 13240, 13243 and 13244 of 2025
TCA No.92 of 2025Commissioner of Income Tax,International Taxation Circle 2(2),Chennai β 600 034.
β¦ Appellant
Vs
Sutherland Global Services Inc.,C/o. Dhruva Advisors LLP, Prestige Terraces, 2nd Floor, Union Street, Infantry Road, Bengaluru - 001. (PAN: AAOCS 1555P)
β¦ Respondent
Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, βDβ Bench, Chennai, dated 22.12.2023 passed in IT (TP) A.No.31/CHNY/2023, for the assessment years i.e., 2017-18.
TCA No.94 of 2025Commissioner of Income Tax,International Taxation,Chennai β 600 034.
β¦ Appellant
__________Page 1 of 4
Vs
M/s.Watanmal Boolchand Company Ltd.,C/o.CRBS and Associates LLP, Chartered Accountants, No.37, 2nd Street, Alagiri Nagar, Vadapalani, Chennai - 600 026. (PAN: AABCW 3559Q)
T.C.A.Nos.92 and 94 of 2025
β¦ Respondent
Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, βDβ Bench, Chennai, dated 22.12.2023 passed in IT (TP) A.No.28/CHNY/2022, for the assessment years i.e., 2006-07.
For Appellant in both cases
: Mr.Karthik RanganathanSr. Standing Counsel
For Respondent : in both cases
Mr.N.V.Balaji
COMMON JUDGMENT(Delivered by SUNDER MOHAN, J)
Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, the learned counsel for the
appellant/revenue, submitted that the above two appeals impugn a
common order dated 22.12.2023 that was set aside by this Court in respect
of another assessee in T.C.A.Nos.80, 81 and 82 of 2025 by an order dated 10.06.2025.
__________
Page 2 of 4
T.C.A.Nos.92 and 94 of 2025
2. We find that in the above appeals, the orders were confirmed by this Court since the ITAT had set aside the assessment orders as the directions of the DRP were invalid for want of a DIN number. The facts are similar in this case and the reasons assigned by us for dismissal of the aforesaid appeals would be applicable to the instant appeals also.
3. Accordingly, the instant appeals are dismissed for the reasons stated in our judgment dated 10.06.2025 made in TCA Nos.80, 81 and 82 of 2025. Since we have already imposed costs in the other appeals, we refrain from imposing costs in these appeals. Consequently, interim applications stand closed.
(K.R.SHRIRAM, C.J.) (SUNDER MOHAN, J.)
12.06.2025
Index: Yes/NoNeutral Citation : Yes/No
ars
__________
Page 3 of 4
T.C.A.Nos.92 and 94 of 2025
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICEAND
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
ars
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, βDβ Bench, Chennai.
2. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (HQ) & Secretary,Dispute Resolution Panel-2,Bengaluru.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai.
T.C.A.Nos.92 and 94 of 2025
12.06.2025
__________
Page 4 of 4
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only β not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CAβclient relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.