The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Chennai v. M/S.farida Holdings P. Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 05.08.2021 CORAM The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMandThe Honourable Mr.Justice SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP T.C.A.Nos.322 & 323 of 2014 The Commissioner of Income tax,Chennai... Appellant in bothAppeals -vs- M/s.Farida Holdings P. Ltd.,151/4, Mount Poonamallee Road,Ramapuram, Chennai-600 089... Respondent in bothAppeals Appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the order dated 13.03.2012 made in I.T.A.Nos.399 & 400(Mds)/2012 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B'Bench, Chennai for the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05respectively. Appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner ofIncome Tax ,(A)- III, Chennai, dated 11.01.2012 made inITA.Nos.774 & 773/09-10/A-III for the Assessment year 2003-04and 2004-2005 respectively. Against the Assessment order passed by Deputy Commissionerof Income Tax, Company Circle-II (1), Chennai, dated 31.12.2009made in G.T.No./PANo.AAACF1155A for the Assessment year 2004-05;2003-04 respectively. For Appellant:Mr.S.Rajesh(In both Appeals)Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent:Ms.S.Sriniranjani(In both Appeals) (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) These appeals, by the appellant/Revenue, filed underSection 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are directed againstthe order dated 13.03.2012, made in I.T.A.Nos.399 & 400(Mds)/2012 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench,Chennai for the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05respectively. 2.The appeals were admitted on 25.08.2014, on the followingsubstantial question of law:- “Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in deleting theaddition made by the Assessing Officer amountingto Rs.2,92,39,206/- under Section 2(22)(e) of theI.T.Act, 1961?” 3.Heard Mr.S.Rajesh, learned Senior Standing Counsel forthe appellant/Revenue and Ms.S.Sriniranjani, learned counsel forthe respondent/assessee. 4.We need not labour much to decide the substantialquestion of law raised in this appeal, as in the assessee's owncase in CIT vs. Farida Holdings Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2016)243 Taxman 423 (Mad.), the appeal filed by the Revenue wasdismissed. The said decision was affirmed by the Hon'bleSupreme Court by common order in CIT vs. Madhur Housing &Development Co., reported in (2018) 93 taxmann.com 502 (SC). 5.Thus, following the above decision, these tax caseappeals are dismissed and the substantial questions of law areanswered against the Revenue. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) // True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar abr https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench,Chennai.Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax,Appeals-III, Chennai.Appeals-III, Chennai. 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Company Circle-II(1), Chennai.Company Circle-II(1), Chennai. 4.The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai.Chennai. T.C.A.Nos.322 & 323 of 2014 LN(CO)SU(06/09/2021)