THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. M/S HYNDUAI MOTOR INDIA LTD

T.C.A.No.319 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 29.06.2021 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA T.C.A.No.319 of 2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ... Appellant Vs. M/s.Hyundai Motor India Ltd., Plot No.H1, SIPCOT Industrial Park, Irungattukottai, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District, Chennai – 602 105. ... Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, "B" Bench, dated 26.12.2014 made in S.P.No.463/Mds/2014 in I.T.A.No.2353/Mds/2012 for the Assessment Year 2008-09. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar, Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.R.Venkatnarayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Page 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.319 of 2015 JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) Challenging the order passed in S.P.No.463/Mds/2014 in I.T.A.No.2353/Mds/2012 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Chennai, the Revenue has filed the above appeal. 2.The above appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: “(i)Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that the assessee had co-operated in the appeal proceedings and granted stay of recovery of tax for a further period of 90 days or until disposal of the appeal whichever is earlier which is contrary to the statutory provisions of Section 254(2A) of Income Tax? (ii)Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad by granting stay of further period of 90 days or until the disposal of the appeal which is contrary to the statutory provision enacted and against the intention of the legislature?” Page 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.319 of 2015 3.When the appeal is taken up for hearing, Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned senior standing counsel appearing for the appellant-Revenue submitted that the above appeal has been filed as against the interim order passed in I.T.A.No.2353/Mds/2012 and that subsequently, by order dated 22.04.2016, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had disposed of the main appeal in I.T.A.No.2353/Mds/2012, therefore, the above appeal, which has been filed as against the interim order passed in the said appeal, has become redundant. 4.Having regard to the submission made by the learned senior standing counsel appearing for the appellant-Revenue, since the Tribunal had already disposed of the main appeal, the appeal filed as against the interim order passed in the said appeal has become redundant. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal is dismissed as infructuous. However, the questions of law, which are raised in the above appeal are left open and shall be decided in an appropriate appeal. No costs.

Index : Yes/No [M.D., J.] [R.H., J.] Internet : Yes 29.06.2021 va

Page 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.319 of 2015 M.DURAISWAMY, J. and R.HEMALATHA, J. va To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, "B" Bench T.C.A.No.319 of 2015 29.06.2021 Page 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/