The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.comstar Automotive Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Chengalpattu

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 06.7.2020 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.301 of 2019 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai ...AppellantVsM/s.Comstar Automotive TechnologiesPvt. Ltd., Chengalpattu-600204....Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 25.10.2018 made in ITA.No.209/Chny/2018 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench forthe assessment year 2003-04, against the order dated 29/09/2017 made in ITA No.330/CIT(A)-11/2013-14 on the file of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-9, Chennai for the Assessment Year 2003-2004 and against the order dated 30/12/2008 made in GIR No/PAN.555-V/AAACM 2284P on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of IncomeTax Company Circle-III(4), Chennai for the Assessment Year 2003-04. We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learnedSenior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenueand Mr.R. Sivaraman, learned counsel appearing for therespondent. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainst the order dated 25.10.2018 made in ITA.No.209/Chny/2018on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C'Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2003-04. 3. The appeal has been admitted on 08.7.2019 on the followingsubstantial questions of law : “i. Whether the set off of broughtforward unabsorbed depreciation of theAssessment year 2001-02 and 2002-03 are tobe first set off before consideringdeduction under Section 10B for theassessment year 2003-04? 2. Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in law in holding that the deductionunder Section 10B is to be allowed withoutconsidering the depreciation loss, when itwas held by the Apex Court in the case ofYokogawa India Ltd that the deduction underSection 10B is to be allowed while computingthe gross total income of the eligibleundertaking under Chapter -IV of the IncomeTax Act? And 3. Whether the Tribunal ought to haveapplied the decision of the Apex Court inthe case of Himatsingke Seide reported in 48Taxmann.com page 357 SC which had held thatthe unabsorbed depreciation loss of Section10B unit cannot be set off against otherincomes, which was neither overruled nordiscussed in Yokogawa India Ltd reported in77 Taxmann.com page 41?” 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel on either side thatthe issue involved in this appeal is covered by the decision inthe assessee's own case in TCA.No.228 of 2011 dated 18.3.2020,by which, the assessee's appeal was allowed and the substantialquestions of law were answered in favour of the assessee. 5. Following the said decision, the above tax case appealfiled by the Revenue is dismissed and the substantial questionsof law are answered in favour of the assessee and against theRevenue. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench.2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-9, Chennai.3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle-III(4), Chennai. TCA.No.301 of 2019rsv[co]srg 25/08/2020