Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.w.s.industries (India) Ltd., Chennai-116

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 19.8.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.1118 of 2010 Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai...AppellantVs M/s.W.S.Industries (India)Ltd., Chennai-116....Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 21.8.2009 made in ITA.No.1373/Mds/2008 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench forthe assessment year 2004-05., as against the order of thecommissioner of Income tax (Appeals)-VIII, Chennai made in ITANo.298/2007-2008 dated 28.3.2008., as against the order of theIncome Tax-Officer Company Ward III(I), Chennai-34 assessmentyear 2004-05 dated 31.03.2004 GIR No/PAN . For Appellant:Mr.M.Swaminathan, SSC, assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa, SCRespondent :served and no appearance Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel, assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counselappearing for the appellant – Revenue. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated21.8.2009 made in ITA.No. 1373/Mds/2008 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench for theassessment year 2004-05. 3. The appeal was admitted on 10.1.2011 on the followingsubstantial question of law :“Whether, on the facts and circumstances https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of the case, the Tribunal was right inholding that the guarantee payments ofRs.13.07 Crores made by the assessee to thebanks and other parties on behalf of itssubsidiary company is for the purpose ofassessee's business is allowable asdeduction?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue onaccount of the low tax effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019dated 08.8.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. Bythe said Circular, the monetary limit for filing or pursuing anappeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore.It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is lessthan the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above tax caseappeal is dismissed on account of the low tax effect. Thesubstantial question of law framed is left open. In the eventthe tax effect is above the threshold limit fixed in the saidcircular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention tothis Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided onmerits. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar RSTo 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal VIII, Chennai. Chennai. 3.The Income Tax Officer Company Ward III(1)Chennai-34.Chennai-34. +1cc to M/s.M.Swaminathan, Advocate SR.70419+1cc to M/s.SubbarayaAiyar, Advocate SR.70475 CNR(CO)CB(15/10/2019) TCA.No.1118 of 2010