Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Leo Prime Company Pvt. Ltd.,61

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATE: 26.03.2021 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI T.C.A.No.1224 of 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax, No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Chennai – 600 034.... Appellant v. M/s. Leo Prime Company Pvt. Ltd.,61 & 62, Lakshmanan Nagar,Kandanchavadi,Chennai – 600 096.PAN : AAA CL 1901 E... Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras, "D" Bench, dated 01.04.2015 inITA.No.1330/Mds/2014 for the Assessment Year 2009-2010Preferred against the order of the Income Tax AppelleteTribunal madras “D” Bench chennai dated 01.04.2015 made inITA.No.1330/mds/2014 for the Assessment Year 2009-2010preferred against the order of the commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-II, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34 dated 18.12.2013 madein ITA.No.518/2013-2014 preferred against the order of theAssistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-II(4),Nungambakkam,Chennai-34dated28.12.2011madeinPAN/GIR.No.AAACL1901E. For Appellant : Mr. Karthik Ranganathan, Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Notice Served We have heard Mr. Karthik Ranganathan, learned SeniorStanding Counsel for the appellant/Revenue. 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainsttheorderdated01.04.2015madeinITA.No.1330/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai, "D" Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) forthe Assessment Year 2009-2010. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The appeal was admitted on the following substantialquestions of law:“ Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case, the appellate Tribunal was rightin holding that the payment made by theassessee for the purpose of use of logo canonly be considered as revenue in nature and nocapital in character as per section 32(1)(ii)of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for theappellant submits that the above appeal is not pursued by theRevenue on account of the Low Tax Effect in terms of CircularNo.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board ofDirect Taxes. By the said Circular, the monetary limit forfiling or pursuing an appeal before the High Court has beenincreased to Rs.1 crore. It is further submitted that the taxeffect in this case is less than the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above TaxCase Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the LowTax Effect. The substantial question of law framed is leftopen. In the event the tax effect in this case is above thethreshold limit fixed in the said Circular, liberty is grantedto the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to restore theappeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar Rj To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai,"D" Bench Chennai,"D" Bench 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Nungambakkam, Chennai. Nungambakkam, Chennai. 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-II (4), Nungambakkam,Chennai-34. Company Circle-II (4), Nungambakkam,Chennai-34. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/