Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.gandhimathi Appliances Ltd. 377, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai 600 018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY T.C.A.No.266 of 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai...Appellantvs.M/s.Gandhimathi Appliances Ltd.377, Anna Salai,Teynampet,Chennai 600 018 ...Respondent Prayer ::- Appeal filed against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras C Bench, dated 28.11.2013 in ITANo.944/Mds/2013 as against the order dated 21/01/2013 of theCommissioner of Income Tax(A)III, Chennai in PAN.No.AAACG2038Ffor the assessment year 2004-05 and as against the order dated30/12/2009 of the Assistant Commissioner of Income tax, Chennai. The Court was held by Video Conference, as per theResolution of the Full Court dated 3 July 2020, by Judges attheir respective residence and the counsel, staff of the Courtappearing from their respective residences. 2. This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue,calling in question the correctness of the order passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, C Bench, ITA No.944/Mds/2013 byraising the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether in the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in law in deleting the addition madetowards market development expenses to theextent of RS.2.20 crores out of the totalclaim of Rs.5.01 crores as against the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ actual debit of Rs.94.56 lakhs in the profitand loss account and directing the AssessingOfficer to verify the remaining portion ofRS.2.81 crores in the light of the ratiolaid down in the case of MIs. BrilliantTutorials P Ltd.? 2. Whether in the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in law in holding the assessee iseligible for the claim of Rs.2.20 crores asagainst Rs.94.56 lakhs debited in the profitand loss account without any evidence insupport of its claim of Rs.2.20 crores forincurring the expenditure in the year underconsideration? 3. Whether in the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in directing the Assessing officer toenquire and verify the details with regardto a sum of Rs.2.81 crores when theassessing himself has admitted that it iseligible for a claim of Rs.2.20 crores onlyout of the sum of Rs.5.01 crores claimed inits returns? 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learnedStanding Counsel brought to our notice the Circular issued bythe Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No.17/2019 dated8 August 2019, wherein, it is stipulated that appeals shall notbe filed/pursued by the Department before the High Court incases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/-(Rupees One Crore). 4. In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the Appeal filedby the Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open thesubstantial questions of law for determination in appropriatecases. No costs. 5 Registry is directed to send a copy of the judgment tothe Respondent / Assessee in the address given in the Appeal. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// To M/s.Gandhimathi Appliances Ltd.377, Anna Salai,Teynampet,Chennai 600 018 2.The Commissioner of Income TaxNungambakkam Chennai-34 T.C.A.No.266 of 2015svl(co)aa01/10/2020