Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 3(2), Chennai v. M/S.youngshin Automotive India Private Limited, Survey

In the High Court of Judicature at MadrasDated : 28.08.2019 The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMandThe Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.84 of 2018 Commissioner of Income Tax,Corporate Circle 3(2), Chennai....Appellant/AppellantVs M/s.Youngshin Automotive India Private Limited,Survey No.307, 310, 317,Vayalur Road, killai Village, Sriperambudur Taluk,Kancheepuram District - 602 105PAN: AAACY4007A...Respondent/Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 01.05.2017 made in ITA.No.3266/MDS/2016 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench forthe assessment year 2012-13 and against the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 3(2) Chennai dated30/09/2016 made in G.I.R. PAN No. and against theorder of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CorporateCircle 3(2) dated 22.02.2016 made in PAN. against theorder of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai 34 dated29.01.2016 made in C.I.R. No. 1/601/TPO 3(2)A1/2012-2013 for theAssessment year 2012-2013. We have heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel, and Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel appearing forthe appellant/revenue and Mr.R.Sandeep Bagmar, learned counselappearing for the respondent/assessee. 2.This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 01.05.2017 made in ITA.No.3266/MDS/2016 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench for theassessment year 2012-13. 3.This appeal was admitted on 03.04.2018 on the followingsubstantial question of law :“Whether in the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred inlaw in allowing customs duty and adjustmentwhile determining the Arms Length Price (ALP)under Section 92C of the Income Tax Act, 1961read with Rule 10B of the Income Tax Rules,1962?" 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 questions of law framed are 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. No costs. -s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS-I) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income TaxCorporate Circle3(2) ChennaiCorporate Circle3(2) Chennai 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income TaxCorporate Circle 3(2) ChennaiCorporate Circle 3(2) Chennai 4.The Deputy Commissioner of Income TaxTransfer Pricing Officer 3(2)2[nd] Floor, Room No. 235 Main BuildingAayakar Bhavan121, Mahathma Gandhi RoadChennai 34.Transfer Pricing Officer 3(2)2[nd] Floor, Room No. 235 Main BuildingAayakar Bhavan121, Mahathma Gandhi RoadChennai 34. +1 CC to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate sr 74850.+1 CC to Mr. Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate sr 7424+1 CC to Mr. Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate sr 7424 VGII(CO)SP(24/10/2019) TCA.No.84 of 2018