THE RELIANCE MOTOR COMPANY LTD.,CHENNAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI

MA 24/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case revolves around a dispute concerning the deduction claimed by Reliance Motor Company Ltd. under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) for the assessment year 1999-2000. Initially, the Tribunal had remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer, following a precedent from the assessee's own case for AY 2000-01. However, the assessee contested this decision, arguing that the circumstances and the legal provisions applicable were different for AY 1999-2000. The Tribunal, upon re-evaluation, acknowledged the oversight and corrected its earlier decision, allowing the deduction as claimed by the assessee based on relevant judicial precedents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 716977 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 04-02-2025
• Other Referred Cases: George Oaks reported in 61 Taxmann 225 (Mad)(E-10), Taparia Tools Ltd. reported in 372 ITR 605 (SC), Simpsons & Co. Ltd. reported in 230 ITR 703 (Mad)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.ANITA
• Assessee Lawyers: R. VIJAYARAGHAVAN

Judgement Text

"आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, ‘’ए’’Ɋायपीठ,चेɄई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI ŵी मनु क ुमार िगįर ,Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जगदीश, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ। BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No. 24/Chny/2025 [In ITA No.404/Chny/2024] िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 1999-2000 The Reliance Motor Company Ltd., 761, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002. [PAN: AAACT1230A] v. The Income Tax Officer , Corporate Ward 3(1), Chennai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 07.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 19.08.2025 आदेश O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM: By way of present miscellaneous application under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (In short “the Act”) the assessee seeks to recall order of this Tribunal in ITA No.404/ Chny/2025 for the assessment year (AY in short) 1999-2000. 2. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, by referring to the miscellaneous petition, submitted that the ITAT, while adjudicating the appeal of the Appellant-Revenue, remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer by following the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2000- 01. He argued vehemently that the Tribunal ought not to have remanded the matter for fresh adjudication. He argued that this Tribunal recorded the facts of Printed from counselvise.com 2 M.A. No. 24/Chny/25 – Reliance Motor the case incorrectly in the impugned order and prayed that the same may be recalled and the issue relating to entire amount payable under VRS scheme of ₹.2,12,08,000/- may be allowed in the light of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of George Oaks reported in 61 Taxmann 225 (Mad)(E-10). 3. The ld. DR vehemently opposed the submissions of the ld. Counsel for the assessee and pleaded for the dismissal of the miscellaneous application. 4. Upon hearing both the parties and on perusal of the impugned order, we note that the Tribunal remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer by following the order of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2000-01. Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee argued that the issue involved in AY 2000-01 is on totally different footing of whether 1/3rd of the VRS payment debited to in the books of account has been added in the return of income, whereas, in the present AY 1999-2000, the assessee claimed the entire amount payable under VRS scheme of ₹.2,12,08,000/- as a deduction, which is allowable in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of George Oaks reported in 61 Taxmann 225 (Mad)(E-10) and also relied on the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. reported in 372 ITR 605 (SC) as well as decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Simpsons & Co. Ltd. reported in 230 ITR 703 (Mad). We find force in the argument of the ld. Counsel for the assessee, which we have escaped to notice during hearing and noted that there is an apparent mistake in the order of the Tribunal dated 09.12.2024. Accordingly, Printed from counselvise.com 3 M.A. No. 24/Chny/25 – Reliance Motor we rectify the order of the Tribunal dated 09.12.2024 passed in ITA No. 404/Chny/2024 for AY 1999-2000 and upheld the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the Revenue on this issue. 5. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on the 19th day of August, 2025, in Chennai. Sd/- (जगदीश,) (JAGADISH) लेखा सद˟/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- (मनु क ुमार िगįर) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) Ɋाियक सद˟/JUDICIAL MEMBER चेɄई/Chennai, िदनांक/Dated: 19th August, 2025. Vm/- 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुƅ/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR 5. गाडŊफाईल/GF Printed from counselvise.com "