M/S.S4 CARLISLE PUBLISHING S vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 6

TCA.No.502 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02.02.2021 CORAM : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA Tax Case Appeal No.502 of 2020 M/s.S4 Carlisle Publishing Service P Ltd, Prakash Towers, 1st Floor, 141, Rajiv Gandhi Salai (OMR), Kottivakkam, Chennai - 600 041. ...Appellant Vs Commissioner of Income Tax 6, Chennai. ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 28.06.2018 made in ITA.No.368/Mds/2018 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, for the assessment year 2008-09. For Appellant: Mr.N.V.Balaji For Respondent: Mr.J.Narayanasamy Senior Standing Counsel 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.502 of 2020 JUDGMENT (Delivered by

T.S.Sivagnanam,J

) This appeal, filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed against the order 28.06.2018 made in ITA.No.368/Mds/2018 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2008-09. 2. The assessee has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: "1. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in not holding that the addition made under Section 68 of the Act is not sustainable, particularly when the appellant had explained the credit to the share capital and share premium account with material evidences? 2. Is the order of the Tribunal in remitting the case back to assessing officer not perverse, particularly when all material evidences were before it? 3. Whether on facts and circumstances of the 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.502 of 2020 case, the Tribunal was right in remitting the case back to the records of the Assessing Officer with a direction to examine whether the valuation of shares done by the assessee is accordance with law or rule and proceed to determine the correct value of share and income, when the issue before the Tribunal was not on the value of shares but whether at all addition could be made under Section 68, when the credit is fully explained by the appellant? 4. Is the Tribunal right in remitting the case back to the assessing officer to examine on valuation of shares particularly when in the earlier year the appellant had issued shares to Indian promoters at price very close to the price at which shares were issued to the non-residence in the impugned year and all the records were before the Tribunal?" 3. We have heard Mr.N.V.Balaji, learned counsel for the appellant-assessee and Mr.J.Narayanasamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Revenue. 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.502 of 2020 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as on date, the case of the assessee has been accepted by the Assessing Officer and therefore, they are withdrawing the appeal. The learned counsel has also sent an e-mail to that effect and the same is taken on record. The learned counsel further submitted that in the event of any action initiated by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Act, the appellant's right to contest should not be foreclosed. 5. The appellant-assessee need not have any such apprehension, because as on date, the stand taken by the assessee has been accepted. If anything has to be done at the higher level, it goes without saying that the statutory remedy available to the assessee under the Act would be fully available and cannot be foreclosed. 6. With the above liberty, the tax case appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. (T.S.S.,J.) (R.N.M.,J.) 02.02.2021 hvk 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.502 of 2020 To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax 6, Chennai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.502 of 2020 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND R.N.MANJULA,J hvk TCA.No.502 of 2020 02.02.2021 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/