The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.caterpillar India Private Limited, (Formerly Known As Caterpillar Commercial Private Limited And Since Merged) 7Th Floor, International Tech Park, Chennai T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23.02.2021 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMANDTHE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA TAX CASE APPEAL NO.215 OF 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai.... AppellantVs M/s.Caterpillar India Private Limited,(formerly known as Caterpillar CommercialPrivate Limited and since merged)7th Floor, International Tech Park,Chennai Taramani Road, Taramani,Chennai - 600 113.PAN: ...Respondent Prayer:-APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the order dated 17.02.2017 made in ITA.No.1722/Mds/2012on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C'Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2007-08. Appeal filed against order of the Commissioner of Income TaxAppeals-IV, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai 600 034 and madein ITA.No.413/11-12/A-1V in PAN.No. for AssessmentYear 2007-2008 in dated 30.12.2011 against Assessment orderdated 24.12.2010 on the file of Deputy Commissioner of IncomeTax, Chennai. For Appellant :Mr.T.Ravi Kumar Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent:Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar PadmanabhanJUDGMENT(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J) This appeal, filed by the Revenue, is directed against theorder dated 17.02.2017 made in ITA.No.1722/Mds/2012 on the fileof the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai('the Tribunal' for brevity) for the assessment year 2007-08. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The Revenue has raised the following substantialquestions of law for consideration: "1. Whether the Tribunal was correct inallowing the deduction of ESOP expensesespecially when the said scheme benefited only 3persons and not all employees and therefore thesame is to be treated as colorable deviceadopted for evading taxes? 2. While computing book profits underSection 115JB, provision made for wealth-tax isto be added back to the book profits as perExplanation 1(a) 1(i) to Section 115JB on theground that it is unascertained liability?" 3. We have heard Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, learned Senior StandingCounselappearingfortheappellant-RevenueandMr.R.Vijayaraghavan,appearingforM/s.SubbarayaAiyarPadmanabhan, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent/assessee submitsthat the respondent/assessee has already filed thedeclaration/undertaking under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and isawaiting orders to be passed in Form No.3. 5. In the light of the subsequent event, the CompetentAuthority shall process the application/declaration inaccordance with the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3of 2020) and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously aspossible. The assessee is given liberty to restore this appealin the event the ultimate decision to be taken on thedeclaration filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the saidAct is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made,the Registry shall entertain the prayer without insisting uponany application to be filed for condonation of delay inrestoration of the appeal and on such request made by theassessee by filing a miscellaneous petition for restoration, theRegistry shall place such petition before the appropriateDivision Bench for orders. 6. The tax case appeal stands disposed of with theaforementioned liberty and consequently, the substantialquestions of law framed are left open. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// hvk Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai. Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai. 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. Chennai. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals IV, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. +1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan, Advocate, S.R.No.11092 +1cc to Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.10826 TCA.No.215 of 2018 JP(CO)CS/22/03/2021