Commissioner of Income Tax vs Areva T and D India Limited (formerly Alstom Ltd.)

K. Raviraja Pandian, J.—These appeals are at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ""A

Bench, Chennai dated July 21, 2006, passed in I. T. A. Nos. 2236/Mds/2005 and 526/Mds/2006 respectively.

The relevant assessment year is 1999-2000. The assessee filed a return of income claiming expenditure of Rs. 56,42,74,000 on account of

voluntary separation scheme, out of which Rs. 6,47,55,000 was towards replenishment of gratuity fund. The Assessing Officer, inter alia, allowed

only a sum of Rs. 6,47,55,000, and the balance amount was disallowed for the purpose of MAT because it was in the nature of provision only.

The Assessing Officer while giving effect to the order levied interest u/s 234D. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer the assessee filed

an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who allowed the appeal in favour of the assessee holding that the assessee had

made a provision towards ascertained liability and deleted the addition and also held that interest u/s 234D is leviable in the present case as the

assessment was completed after the introduction of the section. The Revenue filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on the

issue of deletion of the addition towards provision for voluntary separation scheme for the purpose of calculating profits u/s 115JA and the

assessee filed a cross-objection on the issue of levy of interest u/s 234D. The Appellate Tribunal with regard to the Revenue''s appeal upheld the

order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and allowed the appeal in favour of the assessee, with regard to the interest u/s 234D

following the decision of the Delhi Bench in the case of Glaxo Smith-line Asia P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT in I.T.A. No. 2823/Del/2004 and

819/Del/2005 decided the issue in favour of the assessee. The assessee filed an appeal u/s 260A to this Court against the part of the order which

was against it. This Court found that the notice issued cannot be treated as notice u/s 143(2) and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer,

leaving all issues open, to decide the issue afresh after issue of notice and opportunity to the assessee. This appeal is being filed against that part of

the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal which was against the Revenue.

In view of the order of this Court in the assessee''s own case reported Areva T and D India Limited, (formerly known as ALSTOM Ltd.) Vs.

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, wherein the order of the Tribunal as well as the authorities below have been set aside and liberty was

given to the Assessing Officer to frame the assessment after considering the matter afresh with reference to the objections given by the assessee for

reopening and issuing notice u/s 143(2) of the Act and giving an opportunity to the assessee to raise all contentions relating to reopening of

assessment as well as the merits of the case, nothing survives in these appeals and the Revenue cannot contend that this issue has to be considered

separately. At the risk of repetition, we say that the order of the Tribunal as well as the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Assessing

Officer have been set aside and the matter is directed to be reconsidered afresh and the question of law now raised for maintaining the appeal no

longer exists. Hence, the appeals are dismissed. Consequently, the connected M. P. No. 1 of 2008 is also dismissed.