Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Chennai v. M/S.allianz Bio Sciences Pvt. Ltd., Chennai-81

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 20.8.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMandThe Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.283 of 2011 Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chennai...Appellant/Appellant Vs M/s.Allianz Bio Sciences Pvt. Ltd., Chennai-81....Respondent/Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 19.11.2010 made in ITA.No.1365/Mds/2009 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench forthe assessment year 2005-06.For Appellant :Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, SSC For Respondent:Mr.R.Sivaraman Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learnedSenior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenueand Mr.R. Sivaraman, learned counsel appearing for therespondent – assessee. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated19.11.2010 made in ITA. No.1365/Mds/2009 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench for theassessment year 2005-06. 3. The appeal was admitted on 17.8.2011 on the followingsubstantial questions of law :“i. Whether, on the facts and in the 1 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ circumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding thatthe assessee company was entitled todeduction under Section 80IB in respect ofits unit in Pondicherry even though theentire manufacture of drugs and formulationswere done under 'loan license' only, on thebasis of a job work contract with M/s.Tablets (India) Ltd., which supplied all theraw materials, specifications and exercisedcomplete supervision of the manufacture ofthe drugs ensuring the quantity and qualitythereof ? and ii. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding thattheExplanationunderSection80IAintroduced by the Finance Act, 2007 witheffect from 01.4.2000 was not applicable toSection 80IB ?” 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. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) RSTo1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench, Chennai. 2 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Tax-1, Chennai. Tax-1, Chennai. 3.The Sub Assistant Registrar, Judicial Section, High Court, Madras. Judicial Section, High Court, Madras. +1cc to Mr.T.RaviKumar, Advocate SR.70544 BR(CO)CB(04/12/2019) 3 TCA.No.283 of 2011