Tca/643/2019 Of Lifecell International Pvt Ltd v. Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA M/s.Lifecell International Private Limited26, Vandalur Kelambakkam Main Road,Keelakottaiyur Village,Chennai – 600 048. ...Appellant Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax,Corporate Circle 4(1),121, Uthamar Gandhi Salai,Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras "B" Bench, dated 28.05.2019 passed inI.T.A.No.247/Chny/2018. Against common order of the learnedcommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Chennai(herein aftercalled as CIT (A) dated 08/12/2017 for Assessment year 2013-2014against Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) dated 24/03/2016against Deputy commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Cirlce 4(1)Chennai PAN No in Assessment year 2014-2015 againstthe Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate circle 4(1)Chennai in Assessment Year 2013-2014. This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ against the order dated 28.05.2019 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras "B" Bench, ('the Tribunal' forbrevity) in I.T.A.No.247/Chny/2018 for the assessment year2013-14. The appellant/assessee has raised the followingSubstantial Questions of Law in the above appeal : "1.Whether under the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal is right in upholding theorder of the CIT (A) that the advance storage feesfor 21 years are liable for taxation in the year ofreceipt itself? 2.Is the finding of the Tribunal that theappellant did not controvert the finding of the CIT(A) that the appellant did not follow the matchingconcept, not perverse, particularly when theappellant had placed all material evidences beforethe Tribunal to demonstrate that it had followed thematching concept? 3.Is the Tribunal was right in holding the orderof the CIT(A) that the entire advance storage feesfor 21 years received by the appellant is liable fortaxation in the year of receipt itself, merely on theperverse inference of the CIT(A) that certainexpenditure are not deferred? 4.Whether under the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal was right in not adjudicatingthe ground of the appellant that the CIT(A) is notjustified in not giving the deduction in respect ofrevenue of earlier year enrolments recognized duringthe year?” 2. We have heard Ms.N.V.Lakshmi for Mr.N.V.Balaji, learnedcounsel for the appellant/assessee and Mr.Karthik Ranganathan,learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 3. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide theSubstantial Questions of Law framed for consideration on accountof certain subsequent developments. The Government of Indiaenacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of2020) to provide for resolution of disputed tax and for mattersconnected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act of theParliament received the assent of the President on 17[th] March2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17[th] March 2020. 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form-3on 21.04.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seekspermission of this Court to withdraw the appeal. 5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel forthe appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed aswithdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneouspetition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-IX) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mknTo 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form-3on 21.04.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seekspermission of this Court to withdraw the appeal. 5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel forthe appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed aswithdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneouspetition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-IX) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mknTo 1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "B" Bench 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 4(1), 121, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8 Chennai. +1cc to M/s.N.V.Balaji, Advocate, S.R.No.29581 Tax Case Appeal No.643 of 2019 VSN-II(CO)SB(23/07/2021)