THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. M/S CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPN

T.C.A.Nos.221 and 222 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 05.07.2022 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.Nos.221 and 222 of 2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai .. Appellant in both T.C.As Vs. M/s.Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd. 536, Anna Salai Teynampet Chennai 600 018

.. Respondent in both T.C.As Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 21.03.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai 'C' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos.1979/Mds/2011 and 1981/Mds/2011, respectively. For Appellant in both T.C.As Mr.T.Ravikumar Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent in both T.C.As Mr.R.Venkatanarayan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.221 and 222 of 2015 C O M M O N J U D G M E N T (Judgment was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.) These Tax Case Appeals arise from the common order dated 21.03.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai 'C' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos.1979 and 1981/Mds/2011. 2. By order dated 24.07.2015, this court admitted the aforesaid tax case appeals on the following substantial questions of law: T.C.A.No.221 of 2015 : “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the reopening of assessment under Section 147 was bad in law as it was a change of opinion ?" T.C.A.No.222 of 2015 : “(i)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the disallowance on depreciation on gas sweetening plant amounting to Rs.24.65 lakhs was not proper and is to be allowed ? 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.221 and 222 of 2015 (ii)Whether the finding of the Tribunal is proper by holding that an amount of Rs.65.35 lakhs spent on social and community welfare expenses are to be allowed even though the same was not related to the business of the assessee ? (iii) Whether the Tribunal was right in upholding the order of CIT(A) who had restricted the disallowance to Rs.3,83,405/- instead of Rs.88,04,500/- made by the Assessing Officer by adopting 2% of the exempted income for disallowance ?" 3. When these matters were taken up for consideration, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee submitted that during the pendency of these tax case appeals, the assessee has availed the benefit conferred under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, and filed necessary declarations, which were accepted and Form-5/order for full and final settlement of tax arrears, was also issued by the Income tax department, on 21.04.2021 and 23.04.2021. The learned counsel has also filed Form-5 dated 21.04.2021 and 23.04.2021 to that effect. 4. The aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent/assessee has also been fairly conceded by the learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/ Revenue. 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.221 and 222 of 2015 5. In view of the subsequent development, this court is of the opinion that nothing survives for adjudication in these appeals. Recording the submission so made by the learned counsel on either side, these Tax Case Appeals stand disposed of. No costs. [R.M.D,J.] [M.S.Q, J.] gya 05.07.2022

To 1.The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.221 and 222 of 2015 R. MAHADEVAN, J. AND MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. gya T.C.A.Nos.221 and 222 of 2015 05.07.2022 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis