Remanded

M/S. Star Health and Allied v. Assistant Commissioner of

Madras HC17 Feb 2020WP/15112/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of three writ petitions filed by an insurance company challenging income tax assessments. Relying on a Delhi High Court decision followed by this court and pending Supreme Court appeals on the same issue, the judge set aside the impugned orders and remitted the cases to the respondent to pass fresh orders after the Supreme Court delivers its final decision.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders are set aside; cases remitted to respondent to pass fresh order pending Supreme Court decision on related appeals.

M/S. Star Health and Allied Vs Assistant Commissioner of — Income Tax | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 17.02.2020

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶5

W.P.Nos.15112 & 13955 of 2013 and 3582 of 2012 and W.M.P.Nos.1 & 1 of 2013, and 1 of 2012 and 1 of 2013

¶6

M/s.Star Health and Allied Insurance Co.ltd, Rep by its Company Secretary, Mr.C.M.Kannan Unni, No.1, Star Insurance Towers, New Tank Street, Valluvar Kottam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. ... Petitioner in all W.Ps.

¶7

M/s.Star Health and Allied Insurance Co., Ltd., Rep by its Chief Finance Officer, Mr.S.Ramaswamy

¶8

...Petitioner in W.P.No.3582 of 2012 Vs.

¶9

1.Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle VI (4), 7^th floor, New Block, Room No.705, 121, Mahatma Gandhi road, Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondent in all W.P.Nos.

¶10

2.The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi.

¶11

3.Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Rep.by its Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice & Company affairs, Government of India, Sasthri Bhawan, R.P.marg,

¶12

New Delhi – 110 002. ... Respondents in W.P.No.15112 of 2013

¶13

Prayer in W.P.No.15112 of 2013: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of the writ of Declaration, declaring Circular No.3 of 2012 dated 12.06.2012 issued by the Central Board of Direct

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

Taxes, the 2^nd Respondent herein, as being ultra vires the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of the Income Tax Act and liable to be interpreted in tandem with the provisions of the Explanation 3 resisted with effect from 01.04.2013 such that prior to 01.04.2013 the provisions of sec.115 JB of the Act do not apply tot he petitioner in so far as Profit and Loss account and financials due not required to be maintained in terms of the proviso to Sec.211 of the Companies Act.

¶16

Prayer in W.P.No.13955 of 2013: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of the writ of Certiorari, call for the records in PAN/GIR No.AAJCS4517L dated 30.03.2013 for Assessment Year 201011 on the file of the respondent, quash the same.

¶17

Prayer in W.P.No.3582 of 2012: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of the writ of Certiorari, call for the records in PAN/GIR No.AAJCS4517L order of the assessment dated 27.12.2011 for the Assessment Year 2009-10 on the file of the respondent, quash the same.

¶18

Both the counsel fairly submits that the issue at the moment is squarely covered against the Revenue in terms of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd Vs.DCIT (2018) 407 ITR 658 (Del) which has been followed by this Court.

¶19

2.The learned counsel for the Revenue further submits that the Revenue has preferred SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the above decision of the following three SLPs.

¶20

3.Since the issue is at the moments covered in favor of the petitioner, and considering the fact that the issue is also pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, I am inclined to set aside the impugned order and remit the case back to the respondent to pass a fresh order. The respondent is directed to await for the final decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the

¶21

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

three mentioned appeals i.e., C.A.No.007580/2019; C.A.No.007683 of 2019 and C.A.No.007685 of 2019.

¶23

4.Accordingly, the impugned orders are set aside and the cases are remitted back to the respondent to pass appropriate order after the Hon'ble Supreme Court gives its decision on the subject.

¶24

5.Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed. No cost. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar

//True Copy//

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶29

jas To 1.Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle VI (4), 7^th floor, New Block, Room No.705, 121, Mahatma Gandhi road, Chennai – 600 034. 2.The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi. 3.The Secretary, Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Law, Justice & Company affairs, Government of India, Sasthri Bhawan, R.P.marg, New Delhi – 110 002. +2cc to M/s.M.Arvindkumar, Advocate Sr.13443 +3cc to M/s.N.Muthukumar, Advocate Sr.14047, 14048, 14049 +3cc to M/s.A.P.Srinivas, Advocate Sr.14166, 14164, 14165

¶30

W.P.Nos.15112 & 13955 of 2013 and 3582 of 2012 and W.M.P.Nos.1 & 1 of 2013, and 1 of 2012 and 1 of 2013

¶31

vsn II[co] srg 14/07/2020

¶32

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/S. Star Health and Allied v. Assistant Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Star Health and Allied v. Assistant Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.Topsia Estates Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Commissioner of Customs

Mrf Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner(Ct)-Iii

Rajeev. B.Mehta Vs The Commissioner

Sri. P.Kamalanathan - (Died) K.R.Pradheep (Petitioner) Vs Assistant Commissioner of

Sakthi Sugars Ltd., Vs State of Tamilnadu

M/s. Winner Milk Private Vs The Deputy Commissioner of