Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

M/S.Keesara Plastics Pvt Ltd vs The Assistant/Deputy Commissioner on 31 March, 2021

Bench: T.S.Sivagnanam, R.N.Manjula

                                                                               TCA.Nos.164 to 166 of 2021

                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                        DATED: 31.03.2021

                                                            CORAM :

                                         The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM
                                                             and
                                          The Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA

                                             Tax Case Appeal Nos.164 to 166 of 2021

                     M/s.Keesara Plastics Pvt Ltd.,
                     L-5, SIDCO Industrial Estate,
                     Kodungaiyur, Chennai - 118.                    ...Appellant in all appeals

                                                               Vs

                     The Assistant/Deputy Commissioner
                              of Income Tax,
                     Company Circle - II(4),
                     Chennai - 4.                                   ...Respondent in all appeals


                     COMMON PRAYER: Appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
                     1961          against   the   common     order    dated    17.07.2013        made   in
                     ITA.Nos.1326/Mds/2012, 1237/Mds/2012 and 917/Mds/2013 for the
                     assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10 respectively on the file of
                     the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai.

                                       For Appellant:               Mr.P.J.Rishikesh

                                       For Respondent:              Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, SSC



                     1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                             TCA.Nos.164 to 166 of 2021

                                                COMMON JUDGMENT

(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J) These appeals have been filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) challenging the common order dated 17.07.2013 made in ITA.Nos.1326/Mds/2012, 1237/Mds/2012 and 917/Mds/2013 for the assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10 respectively on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity).

2. The appeals were admitted on 27.03.2014 on the following substantial questions of law:

"a) Whether, in facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in denying deduction to the assessee under Section 80IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, especially when the Tribunal has itself given a positive finding that the assessee is carrying out manufacturing activity, which is sine quo non for claiming exemption under Section 80IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961?
b) Whether, in facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in making an enquiry as to whether substantial manufacturing activity is being carried on at Chennai unit or Dehradun unit, which is not a condition precedent under Section 80IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961?
c) Whether, in facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has jurisdiction to deny 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.Nos.164 to 166 of 2021 exemption under Section 80IC on the ground that only small quantity of goods are manufactured at Dehradun?
d) Whether, in facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in going into the accounts of the assessee's units and make a roving enquiry especially when Section 80IC does not contemplate so?
e) Whether, in facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Assessee has adopted colorable devise to claim exemption under Section 80IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961?"

3. We have heard Mr.P.J.Rishikesh, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.R.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Revenue.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant/assessee submits that the assessee already filed the declaration/undertaking under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and awaiting orders to be passed in Form No.3.

5. In the light of the subsequent event, the assessee is given liberty to restore these appeals in the event the ultimate decision taken on the declaration filed by the assessees under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessees. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall entertain 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.Nos.164 to 166 of 2021 the prayer without insisting upon any application to be filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appeals and on such request made by the assessees by filing a miscellaneous petition for restoration, the Registry shall place such petition before the appropriate Division Bench for orders.

6. The tax case appeals stand disposed of with the aforementioned liberty. Consequently, the substantial questions of law framed are left open. No costs.

                                                                         (T.S.S.,J.)    (R.N.M.,J.)
                                                                                31.03.2021
                     Index:Yes/No
                     Internet:Yes/No

Note: Registry is directed to upload the order on 01.04.2021 hvk 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.Nos.164 to 166 of 2021 To

1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai.

2. The Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle - II(4), Chennai - 4.

5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.Nos.164 to 166 of 2021 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND R.N.MANJULA,J hvk TCA.Nos.164 to 166 of 2021 31.03.2021 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/