COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. SUN TV NETWORK LTD.,

T.C.A.Nos.854 to 858 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 10.08.2022 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.Nos.854 to 858 of 2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax Non Corporate Circle 20(1) Chennai 600 034 .. Appellant in all T.C.As Vs. M/s.Sun TV Network Limited Murasoli Maran Towers 73, MRC Nagar Main Road MRC Nagar, Chennai 600 028 PAN : AADCS 4885 K

.. Respondent in all T.C.As Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 19.02.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai, in respective I.T.A.Nos.1340/Mds/2015, 1341/Mds/2015, 1577/Mds/2015, 1578/Mds/2015 and 1579/Mds/2015. For Appellant in all T.C.As Mr.M.Swaminathan Mrs.V.Pushpa Standing Counsels For Respondent in all T.C.As Mr.Rahul Balaji (undertook to file vakalat) 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.854 to 858 of 2016 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 19.02.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai, in respective I.T.A.Nos.1340/Mds/2015, 1341/Mds/2015, 1577/Mds/2015, 1578/Mds/2015 and 1579/Mds/2015, relating to the assessment years 2005-06, 2010-11 and 2011-12. 2. By order dated 19.12.2016, this court admitted the aforesaid tax case appeals on the following substantial questions of law: T.C.A.Nos.854 and 855 of of 2016: “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that there cannot be any disallowance towards interest paid on the borrowed funds under Section 14A read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in not considering, if the loan funds were mixed up and used for normal business purposes and used for purchase of exempted income yielding investment are there then Rule 8(D)(2)(ii) is applicable?” 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.854 to 858 of 2016 T.C.A.Nos.856, 857 and 858 of of 2016: “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the rights are found incapable of sustained exploitation after the first broadcast and hence considering the principles of consistency and nature of expenditure, the same has to be treated as revenue in nature, since the assessee does not derive enduring benefit, when films once broadcasted are not going out of shelf? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in reversing the capitalization of the expenses by the Assessing Officer when the fact remains that as per accounting standards issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, copy rights in films/serials are intangible assets and writing off of entire cost of the acquiring such rights at the first broadcast itself on the ground that future revenues are not ascertainable with reasonable accuracy, cannot be accepted as it neither adheres to the principles of accounting standards nor income tax law? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in dismissing the appeal of the revenue, holding that the monies received are shown as deferred revenue by the assessee in the year of receipt and are offered as income in the year when programme is aired when the fact remains that the assessee is following Mercantile System of accounting and the impugned revenue has to be offered only in the current year?” 3. When these matters were taken up for consideration, the learned 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.854 to 858 of 2016 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 18.08.2021 and 19.08.2021. The learned counsel has also filed Form-5 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 Counsels appearing for the appellant/ Revenue. 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 10.08.2022

To 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.854 to 858 of 2016 1.The Commissioner of Income Tax Non Corporate Circle 20(1) Chennai 600 034 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Non Corporate Circle 20(1) (Previously Media Circle II) Chennai 600 034 4.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 14 Chennai

R. MAHADEVAN, J. AND 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.854 to 858 of 2016 MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. gya T.C.A.Nos.854 to 858 of 2016 10.08.2022 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis