Commissioner Of Income Tax Iv, Chennai-34 v. M/S.mohamed Idris Bros. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai-1

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Commissioner of Income Tax IV, Chennai-34. ...Appellant/AppellantVs M/s.Mohamed Idris Bros. Pvt.Ltd., Chennai-1....Respondent/Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 13.2.2015 made in ITA.No.104/Mds/2014 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench forthe assessment year 2010-11, against the order passed by theCommissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)IV, Chennai-34, made inITA.NO.437/13-14 dated 03.10.2013 and against the order passedby the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-IV(3), Chennai, made in P.A.NO.AAACM5231G dated 11.02.13. For Appellant: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, SSC assisted by Mr.S.Rajesh, SCFor Respondent: Ms.Sree Lakshmi Valli for Mr.G.Baskar 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 and Ms.Sree Lakshmi Valli,learned counsel appearing for the respondent – assessee.2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated13.2.2015 made in ITA.No. 104/Mds/2014 on the file of the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench for the assessmentyear 2010-11. 1/3 3. The Revenue has filed this appeal by raising the followingsubstantial questions of law : “i. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in deleting the additionmade under Section 40A(3A) by relying onRule 6DD(d) which deals with bookadjustments and cash payment totally outsidethe purview of Rule 6DD(d) of the Income TaxRules ? andii. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in deleting the additionmade under Section 40A(3A) by relying onRule 6DD(k) which deals with payment made toits agents and when cash payments directlymade to the weavers of the sister concernwhich is totally outside the purview of Rule 6DD(d) of the Income Tax Rules?” 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 raised 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(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench. Chennai. Chennai. 2/3 2.The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)IV, Chennai-34. 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Company Circle-IV(3),Chennai-34. +1cc to M/s.Sreelakshmi Valli, Advocate sr.75981 TCA.No.519 of 2016 bs(co)nr 24/10/2019 3/3