Commissioner Of Income Tax,Chennai Iii v. M/S.sundaram Home Finance Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.92 and 93 of 2009 Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai III. ... Appellantin both the Appeals -vs- M/s.Sundaram Home Finance Ltd.,46, Whites Road,Royapettah, Chennai-600 014.... Respondentin both the Appeals Tax Case (Appeals) filed under Section 260-A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 against the common order of the Income-taxAppellate Tribunal Bench 'C' Chennai, dated 14.08.2008 inI.T.A.Nos.27 and 28/Mds/2008 for the assessment years 2003-04and 2004-05 respectively. Preferred against the Order dated25/09/2007 by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals V, inITA.no. 121 of 122/2006-07 against the Assessment order dated30/09/2005 for the Assessment Year 2003-04 and 2004-05 by theAssestant commissioner of Income Tax, Company circle VI (4),Chennai. For Appellant:Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar,Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent:Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan,For M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar,Padmanabhan, Ramamani COMMON JUDGMENT(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income-tax Act, 1961, are directed against the common orderof the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Bench 'C' Chennai, (forbrevity “the Tribunal”) dated 14.08.2008, in I.T.A.Nos.27 and28/Mds/2008 for the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05respectively. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The appeals have been admitted, on 19.03.2009, on thefollowing substantial question of law:-“Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunalwas right in holding that the interest earned by theassessee company from the Statutory LiquidityReserve Investments is eligible for deduction u/s 36(1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act.” 3. Heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the appellant; and Mr.R.Venkata Narayana, learnedcounsel for the respondent. 4. We have perused the order passed by the Tribunal andfrom paragraph 2 of the order, we find that the tax effect inthe case is well below the threshold limit prescribed under theCircular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018. Hence, the appeals aredismissed on the ground of low tax effect and the substantialquestion of law, framed for consideration, is left open. Nocosts. The Revenue is at liberty to seek for restoration ofappeal if at a later point of time, it is found that the taxeffect is above the threshold limit or to fall under theexceptional clauses mentioned in the Circular. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-VI) //True Copy// 1.The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Bench 'C' Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals (V), 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai 34. 3. The Assistant commissioner of Income Tax, Company circle VI (4), Chennai. +1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No. 78975+1cc to Mr.Subbaraya Aiyar, Advocate, S.R.No. 78978 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/