Commissioner Of Income Tax Ii v. M/S.e-Care India Pvt. Ltd.,B.r. Complex, Ii Floor

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 27.08.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMandThe Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal Nos.776 to 780 of 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax II,No.121, Nungambakkam High Road,Chennai - 600 034. ...Appellant Vs M/s.E-Care India Pvt. Ltd.,B.R. Complex, II Floor,No.27-28, Woods Road, Chennai - 600 002.PAN: ...Respondent APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the common order dated 09.01.2015 made in ITA.Nos.2650to 2654/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench for the assessment years 2007-08 to2011-12, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-II, Chennai -34, made in ITA.Nos.645,1083,1285,1385and 1811/2013-14, dated 19.05.2014, against the order of theDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle-II(1), Chennaimade in PAN/GIR.Nos. , dated 07.12.2009, 31.12.2010,30.09.2011, 22.03.2013 and 27.11.2013 for the Assessment years2007-08 to 2011-12. COMMON JUDGMENT(Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J) We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel assisted by Mr.S.Rajesh, learned Standing Counselappearing for the appellant – Revenue. 2.These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961, are directed against the common orderdated 09.01.2015 made in ITA.Nos.2650 to 2654/Mds/2014 on the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench forthe assessment years 2007-08 to 2011-12. 3.The appeals were admitted on 03.11.2015 on the followingsubstantial questions of law :“1) Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Honourable Income TaxAppellate Tribunal is right in holding that theexpenditure in foreign exchange is to be excludedfrom both export and total turnover while computingeligible deduction under Section 10B of the Act? 2) Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right indirecting the assessing officer to take the totalprofit of the business without reducing theproportionate profit relating to domestic turnoverwhile computing deduction under Section 10B of theAct? 3) Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right inholding that 60% of depreciation is allowable forUPS used in computer which is not a part and parcelof a computer?" 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeals are 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 the respectivecases is less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above tax caseappeals are dismissed on account of the low tax effect. Thesubstantial questions of law framed are left open. In the eventthe tax effect in the respective cases is above the thresholdlimit fixed in the said circular, liberty is granted to theRevenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appealsto be heard and decided on merits. No costs.Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench, Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), Chennai -34. 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle-II(1), Chennai. AKM/16.10.19/3P-4C / TCA.Nos.776 to 780 of 2015