The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.redington (India) Ltd., Spl Guindy House

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 25.03.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI Tax Case Appeal No.158 of 2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai.... Appellant/RespondentVs. M/s.Redington (India) Ltd.,SPL Guindy House,95, Mount Road, Guindy,Chennai – 600 032. ... Respondent/Appellant Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras"D" Bench,Chennaidated07.08.2015passedinI.T.A.No.221/Mds/2013, for the assessment year 2008-09 againstthe order of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals V), Chennai-34,dated 26.10.2012 in CIT(A)-V/ITA:478-2011-12, for the assessmentyear 2008-09 and arising out of the Assessment order of(Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Company Circle V(3),Chennai-34) dated 09.02.2012 in PAN/GI.NO. . For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.R.Venkatanarayanan J U D G M E N T(Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) The appeal filed by the Department under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directedagainst the order dated 07.08.2015 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench, ('the Tribunal' forbrevity) in I.T.A.No.221/Mds/2013 for the assessment year 2008-09. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.On 29.02.2016, the above appeal was admitted on thefollowing Substantial Questions of Law: “1)Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in not appreciating thefact that the name of associate enterprise of theassessee does not constitute its trade mark, which isnot identical to that of the assessee for justifyingthe payment made relating to guarantee commission bythe assessee to its associate enterprise who is theregistered owner of the trademark? 2)Is not the finding of the Tribunal badespecially when the assessee is using the trademarksince 1993 whereas the associate enterprise was formedonly in the year 2005 and therefore, payments madeunder the Trade Mark Licence fee are not proper? 3)Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in deleting the additionsmade on account of corporate guarantee given by theassessee to its associate enterprise that it is not ainternational transaction especially when Section 92Bof the Income Tax Act was amended by Finance Act, 2012with effect from 01.04.2012 includes 'guarantee' as aninternational transaction? 4)Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in setting aside thedisallowance made under Section 14A and remitting thematter back to the Assessing Officer especially whenin the previous year on the same issue the additionswere confirmed by the Tribunal and there was no changein the circumstances in the present year?” 3.We have heard Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, learned Senior Standingcounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.R.Venkatanarayanan,learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. 4. 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. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5.The learned counsel for the respondent/assessee submittedthat the respondent/assessee had availed Vivad Se Vishwas Schemeand that the Department had also issued Form – 3 on 27.01.2021. 6. Since the assessee has been issued with Form – 3, nothingsurvives for adjudication in the above appeals. Recording thesubmissionmadebythelearnedcounselfortherespondent/assessee, the Tax Case Appeals stand disposed of. Nocosts. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5.The learned counsel for the respondent/assessee submittedthat the respondent/assessee had availed Vivad Se Vishwas Schemeand that the Department had also issued Form – 3 on 27.01.2021. 6. Since the assessee has been issued with Form – 3, nothingsurvives for adjudication in the above appeals. Recording thesubmissionmadebythelearnedcounselfortherespondent/assessee, the Tax Case Appeals stand disposed of. Nocosts. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vaTo 1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench, Chennai.2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals V), Chennai-34. 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle V(3), Chennai-34. 4.The Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, III Floor, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai-90. +1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar, Advocate Sr.No.19731 +1cc to MR.T.Ravi kumar, Advocate Sr.No.19764 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/