Commissioner Of Income Tax-I,Chennai v. M/S.dsm Soft P. Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 26.11.2018 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR Tax Case (Appeal) No.43 of 2011 Commissioner of Income Tax-I,Chennai. -vs- ... Appellant M/s.DSM Soft P. Ltd.,No.1, 15th Cross St., Shastri Nagar,Adyar, Chennai - 600 020. ... Respondent Tax Case (Appeal) filed under Section 260-A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income-tax AppellateTribunal, “D” Bench, Chennai, dated 23.08.2010, passed inI.T.A.No.890/Mds/2010 for the assessment year 2007-08, Appealfiled against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals-III), 121 Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-34 inITA.NO.268/09-10 1A 111 dated 15/03/10 in GIR/PAN.NO. AAACD3149Rfor the Assessment year 2007-08 against the Assessment orderdated 17/12/09 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of IncoemTax, Company circle 1(4) Chennai in PAN/GIR.NO. forthe Assessment year 2007-08. For Appellant:M/s.R.Hemalatha Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent :Mr.R.Sivaraman This appeal by the appellant/Revenue is directed againstthe order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench,Chennai, dated 23.08.2010, passed in I.T.A.No.890/Mds/2010 forthe assessment year 2007-08. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.Heard M/s.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel forthe appellant/Revenue and Mr.R.Sivaraman, learned counsel forthe respondent/assessee. 3.This Appeal has been admitted on 22.02.2011, on thefollowing substantial question of law:- “Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding that thebusiness losses of a unit which is not eligiblefor deduction u/s.10A of the Act could not to beset off against the profits of the undertakingeligible for deduction u/s.10A for the purposeof determining the allowable deduction u/s.10Aof the Act?" 4.We have perused the Order of Assessment as well as theOrder passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and we find thatthe tax effect in this appeal is lesser than the threshold limitmentioned in Circular No.3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, issued bythe Central Board of Direct Taxes, which fixes the monetarylimit as Rs.50,00,000/- for the Department to pursue the matter.Furthermore, the Revenue has not been able to point out anydistinguishing features, by which the Circular No.3 of 2018,dated 11.07.2018, cannot be applied. 5.Thus, for the above reasons, the Revenue cannot pursuethis Appeal in view of the low tax effect. Hence, the Appeal isdismissed and the Substantial Question of Law, framed forconsideration, is left open. No costs. The Revenue is atliberty to seek for restoration of appeal if at a later point oftime, it is found that the tax effect is above the thresholdlimit or to fall under the exceptional clauses mentioned in theCircular. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals-III) No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-34. 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Company circle 1(4), Chennai.Company circle 1(4), Chennai. +1cc to Mr.T.Ravikumar, Advocate sr.no.80607 +1cc to Mr.R.Sivaraman, Advocate sr.no.81550 Tax Case (Appeal) No.43 of 2011 ks(co) nr 21/12/2018