Tca/319/2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Hynduai Motor India Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATE: 29.06.2021 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA T.C.A.No.319 of 2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai.... Appellant/Respondent M/s.Hyundai Motor India Ltd.,Plot No.H1, SIPCOT Industrial Park,Irungattukottai, Sriperumbudur Taluk,Kancheepuram District,Chennai – 602 105.... Respondent/ Appellant Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras, "B" Bench, dated 26.12.2014 made in S.P.No.463/Mds/2014in I.T.A.No.2353/Mds/2012 for the Assessment Year 2008-09 asagainst the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Large Tax Payer Unit, Chennai dated 29/10/2012 made inGIR.No./PAN No. for the assessment year 2008 – 2009. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar, Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.R.Venkatnarayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) Challenging the order passed in S.P.No.463/Mds/2014 inI.T.A.No.2353/Mds/2012 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, “B” Bench, Chennai, the Revenue has filed the aboveappeal. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The above appeal was admitted on the followingsubstantial questions of law: “(i)Whether the Tribunal is right in holding thatthe assessee had co-operated in the appeal proceedingsand granted stay of recovery of tax for a furtherperiod of 90 days or until disposal of the appealwhichever is earlier which is contrary to the statutoryprovisions of Section 254(2A) of Income Tax? (ii)Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad bygranting stay of further period of 90 days or until thedisposal of the appeal which is contrary to thestatutory provision enacted and against the intentionof the legislature?” 3.When the appeal is taken up for hearing, Mr.T.Ravikumar,learned senior standing counsel appearing for the appellant-Revenue submitted that the above appeal has been filed asagainst the interim order passed in I.T.A.No.2353/Mds/2012 andthat subsequently, by order dated 22.04.2016, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal had disposed of the main appeal inI.T.A.No.2353/Mds/2012, therefore, the above appeal, which hasbeen filed as against the interim order passed in the saidappeal, has become redundant. 4.Having regard to the submission made by the learnedsenior standing counsel appearing for the appellant-Revenue,since the Tribunal had already disposed of the main appeal, theappeal filed as against the interim order passed in the saidappeal has become redundant. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal isdismissed as infructuous. However, the questions of law, whichare raised in the above appeal are left open and shall bedecided in an appropriate appeal. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(L.A) //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar va To 1. The Registrar, The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, "B" Bench. 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Chennai. +1cc to Mr.T.Ravikumar, Advocate S.R.No.29903 +1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar, Advocate SR.No.29950 T.C.A.No.319 of 2015 GP(CO)RLP(30/07/2021)