The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.hyundai Motor India Ltd.,Irungattukottai, Sriperumbudurtaluk, Kanchipuram District

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.1002 of 2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai ...Appellant/Appellant Vs M/s.Hyundai Motor India Ltd.,Irungattukottai, SriperumbudurTaluk, Kanchipuram District. ...Respondent/Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 29.5.2015 made in S.P.No.339/Mds/2015 inITA.No.2157/Mds/ 2011 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment year 2007-08, andagainsttheorderdated31/10/2011madeinGIRNo/PAN.No. on the file of the Deputy Commissioner ofIncome-Tax, Large Tax payer Unit, Chennai, for the Assessmentyear 2007-2008, and against the order dated 30/09/2011 made inF.No.DRP/Chennai/Sectt./53/2011 for the Assessment year 2007-08. For Appellant :Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC & Mrs.R.Hemalatha, SSC For Respondent:Mr.S.P.Chidambaram Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,JWe have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar and Mrs.R.Hemalatha learnedSenior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenueand Mr.S.P. Chidambaram, learned counsel appearing for therespondent. 1 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 29.5.2015 made in S.P.No.339/Mds/2015 inITA.No.2157/Mds/2011 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for theassessment year 2007-08. 3. The appeal has been admitted on 03.11.2015 on thefollowing substantial questions of law : “i. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in extending the stay beyond theperiod of 365 days which is contrary to theThird Proviso stated in Section 254(2A) ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 ? ii. Is not the finding of the Tribunalbad by extending the stay for a furtherperiod of 60 days on 29.5.2015 which wouldin aggregate amount to in all 806 days whichis contrary to the statutory provisionsenunciated in Section 254(2A) ThirdProviso ? Andiii. Whether the Tribunal has power togrant stay beyond 365 days in aggregateespecially when the Third Proviso to Section254(2A) clearly indicates that if the appealis not disposed of within the periodallowed, then the order of stay shall standvacated ?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for theRevenue submit that the main appeal itself had already beendisposed of by the Tribunal. 5. The said submission of the learned Senior Standing Counselis recorded. 6. In view of the subsequent development, which took placeduring the pendency of this appeal, the necessity to decide thesubstantial questions of law framed for consideration would notarise, as the issues have become academic. 7. Accordingly, the above tax case appeal is closed leavingthe substantial questions of law framed for consideration to be 2 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ agitated in any other proceedings, if the respondent – assesseeor any other assessee deems it appropriate. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar RSTo1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench.2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai.3.The Income Tax Department, Dispute Resolution Panel(DRP) Chennai.TCA.No.1002 of 2015NR(CO)CB(23/09/2020)