Tca/675/2018 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.united India Insurance

In the High Court of Judicature at MadrasDated : 24.6.2019 The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMand The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.675 of 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Larger Tax Payer Unit,Chennai....Appellant / Appellant M/s.United India Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai-34....Respondent / Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the order dated 15.3.2018 made in ITA No.1802/Mds/2011on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai 'A'Bench for the assessment year 2002-03, against the Order dated29/08/2011 and made in ITA No.4/10-11/LTU(A) on the file of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Larger Taxpayer Unit,Chennai against the Order dated 15/12/2009 and made inAAACU5552C/2002-03 on the file of the Deputy Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Larger Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan, SSC Judgment was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act), is directed againstthe order dated 15.3.2018 passed by the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) in ITANo.1802/Mds/2011 for the assessment year 2002-03. 2. The Revenue has filed this appeal by raising thefollowing substantial questions of law : “i. Whether the Tribunal was right andjustified in holding that the AssessingOfficer cannot invoke the provision of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Section 115JB although the order givingeffect to the Tribunal's order resulted inloss under normal provision and resultedunder MAT calculation under Section 115JB ofthe Act ? And ii. Whether the Tribunal erred indeleting the addition made to the booksprofit on account of diminution in the valueof assets was in accordance with law that isas per Sub-Clause (i) of Explanation 1 toSection 115JB, which was introduced in theStatute vide Finance Act 2009 withretrospective effect from 01.4.2001 ?” 3. We have heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel appearing for the Revenue. Though the respondent wasserved and the name of the respondent is printed in the causelist, none appears for the respondent. 4. The short question involved in this case is as to whetherthe Assessing Officer, while giving effect to the order passedby the Tribunal, can travel beyond the order and recompute thebook profits under Section 115JB of the Act. 5. This aspect was considered by the Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeals), Large Tax Payer Unit, Chennai [for brevity, theCIT(A)] in his order dated 29.8.2011 and found that in the orderpassed by the Tribunal for the assessment year 2002-03, therelief was granted in respect of diminution in the value ofassets other than actively treated equities and addition onaccount of deferred interest on debentures. It was further foundthat while giving effect to the order of the Tribunal, theAssessing Officer should have restricted the order only to thedirections of the Tribunal regarding deletion of those twoamounts and that in the absence of any specific direction on re-computation of tax under Section 115JB of the Act, the AssessingOfficer was not within his power to make adjustment to the bookprofits. Ultimately, the appeal filed by the assessee wasallowed by the CIT(A). 6. At the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal re-examinedthe matter and concurred with the findings of the CIT(A). In ourconsidered view, the findings rendered by both the CIT(A) aswell as the Tribunal are perfectly right and fully justified. 7. For the said reasons, the above tax case appeal fails andis dismissed, as there is no substantial question of law arisingfor consideration in this appeal. for consideration in this appeal. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// RS Sub Assistant Registrar To 1)The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench 6. At the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal re-examinedthe matter and concurred with the findings of the CIT(A). In ourconsidered view, the findings rendered by both the CIT(A) aswell as the Tribunal are perfectly right and fully justified. 7. For the said reasons, the above tax case appeal fails andis dismissed, as there is no substantial question of law arisingfor consideration in this appeal. for consideration in this appeal. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// RS Sub Assistant Registrar To 1)The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench 2)The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Larger Taxpayer Unit, Chennai 3)The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Larger Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. +1 cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate, S.R.No.52464 SSP(CO)SSM(06/08/2019). TCA.No.675 of 2018