T.V.SUNDRAM IYENGAR & SONS L vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

PDF · subscribers
TCA/1156/2015HC Madras01 April 2021Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DURAISWAMY5 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the substantial questions of law framed for consideration. This was due to the enactment of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The learned counsel for the assessee informed the Court that the assessee had been issued Form-3 under this Act and sought permission to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the Tax Case Appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. No finding was reached on the merits of the foreign study expenses or the disallowance under Section 14A. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee, T.V. Sundram Iyengar & Sons Ltd., filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 03.07.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench, for the assessment year 2010-11. The appeal was admitted on 09.12.2015. The dispute pertains to the disallowance of foreign study expenses and the confirmation of disallowance under Section 14A of the Act. Subsequent to the admission of the appeal, the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, was enacted. The assessee informed the court that it had been issued Form-3 under this Act and sought permission to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide two substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in disallowing the foreign study expenses incurred by the assessee on six sponsored individuals as personal expenses, not allowable under Section 37 of the Act. 2. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in confirming the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act, especially in the absence of a finding by the Assessing Officer regarding errors in accounts or actual expenses incurred in relation to dividend income. The assessee contended that the foreign study expenses were not personal but business-related. The assessee also argued that the disallowance under Section 14A was unjustified due to the lack of specific findings by the Assessing Officer. The revenue's contentions are not explicitly recorded in the provided text.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 37,Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Tax Case Appeal No.1156 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 01.04.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI Tax Case Appeal No.1156 of 2015 T.V.Sundram Iyengar & Sons Ltd., Madurai.

... Appellant Vs.

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai. ... Respondent

Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench, dated 03.07.2015 passed in I.T.A.No.2777/Mds/2014. For Appellant : Mr.N.V.Balaji For Respondent : Mr.M.Swaminathan

Senior Standing Counsel and Mrs.V.Pushpa Standing Counsel Page 1/5 Tax Case Appeal No.1156 of 2015 J U D G M E N T (Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directed against the order dated 03.07.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.2777/Mds/2014 for the assessment year 2010-11. The above appeal has been admitted on 09.12.2015 on the following Substantial Questions of Law: "1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal, is justified in law in disallowing the foreign study expenses incurred by the assessee on six persons sponsored by it for undertaking higher studies abroad as personal expenses and not allowable under Section 37 of the Act? 2.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal, is justified in law in confirming the dis-allowance under Section 14A of the Act, especially when there is no finding by the Assessing Officer that there was any error in the accounts or that the assessee has actually incurred any expenses in relation to dividend income?” Page 2/5 Tax Case Appeal No.1156 of 2015 2. We have heard Mr.N.V.Balaji, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel and Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent/Revenue. 3. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide the Substantial Questions of Law framed for consideration on account of certain subsequent developments. The Government of India enacted the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) to provide for resolution of disputed tax and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act of the Parliament received the assent of the President on 17th March 2020 and published in the Gazette of India on 17th March 2020. 4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/ assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form-3 on 05.03.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the appeal. Page 3/5 Tax Case Appeal No.1156 of 2015 5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, the Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. [M.D., J.] [T.V.T.S., J.] Index : Yes/No 01.04.2021 Internet : Yes

mkn To 1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai. Page 4/5 Tax Case Appeal No.1156 of 2015 M. DURAISWAMY, J. and T.V. THAMILSELVI, J. mkn Tax Case Appeal No.1156 of 2015

01.04.2021 Page 5/5

More judgments on Section 37

All 4,334 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →