Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Hundai Motor India Limited on 23 November, 2018
Author: Vineet Kothari
Bench: Vineet Kothari, Anita Sumanth
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.11.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
AND
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
Tax Case (Appeal) No.422 of 2009
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Hundai Motor India Limited,
Plot No.H-1 SIPCOT Industrial Park,
Irungattukottai, Kanchipuram Dist.
Pin Code 602 105.
PAN: AAACH2364M Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Sec. 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Madras 'D' Bench, Chennai, dated 21.11.2008 in ITA
No.2428/Mds/2005.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar,
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.Vijayaraghavan for
M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the court was delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J.) The Revenue has filed this appeal raising the following http://www.judis.nic.in 2 substantial questions of law arising from the order of the appellate Tribunal dated 21.11.2008 in I.T.A.No.2428/Mds/2005 in respect of the assessment year 2003-04:-
"1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to interest under section 244A when the dispute in the impugned order was only with reference to the refund arising out of excess tax paid by adjustment of MAT credit?
2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that since the MAT credit was adjusted first before adjustment of advance tax, the refunds paid first would pertain to MAT credit and the refunds paid later would pertain to advance tax/TDS?
3. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that since the MAT credit was adjusted first before adjustment of advance tax, the refunds paid first would pertain to MAT credit and the refunds paid later would pertain to advance tax/TDS?
4. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the http://www.judis.nic.in 3 case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sandvik Asia applies to the facts of this case, when refunds have been paid at every stage immediately on passing of the relevant orders giving relief?"
2. The learned Tribunal, in its order, relied upon the order of the Supreme Court in Sandvik Asia Ltd. v. CIT (280 ITR 643) and held that once a MAT credit is given and there is still tax payable and after giving further credit for TDS and advance tax, then refund, if any can be said to have originated from the payment of Advance Tax or credit of TDS and the assessee is entitled to interest, in terms of sections 244 and 244 of the Act as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Sandvik Asia (supra).
3. The same view was reiterated in the decision of the Apex Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Tulsyan Nec Ltd. (330 ITR 226 (SC) and followed in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Ambattur Clothing Limited ((2015) 375 ITR 223 (Madras) and also in the decision of Karnataka High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax and another v. Sami Labs Ltd. ((2011) 79 CCH 145 (Kar.).
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we are of the considered opinion that the issues raised by the http://www.judis.nic.in 4 Revenue in this case is covered by the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sandvik Asia's case and the subsequent decision of this court.
5. Accordingly, we dismiss the Tax Case Appeal filed by Revenue by answering the substantial questions of law against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.
(V.K.,J.) (A.S.M.,J.) 23.11.2018.
Index: Yes/No. Internet: Yes/No. ssk.
http://www.judis.nic.in 5 Dr.VINEET KOTHARI, J.
and Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J.
ssk.
T.C.A.No.422 of 2009 23.11.2018.
http://www.judis.nic.in