Commissioner Of Income Taxchennai v. J U D G M E N T

DATED: 7.12.2018 CORAMTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH Commissioner of Income TaxChennai Appellant Vs. M/s.S&S Power Finvest Limited,168 Mount Poonamallee Road,Porur, Chennai 600 116.Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 23.2.2007 made in ITANo.1528/Mds/2003 preferred against the order of the Commissionerof Income Tax (Appeals)VI in I.T.A. No. 554/01-02 dated25.03.2003 filed against the Assessment order dated 28.03.2001on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CompanyCircle IV(6) Chennai 6 for the Assessment year 1998-1999. For Appellant : Ms.K.G.Usharani for Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar Senior Standing CounselFor respondent : Mr.Vikram Vijayaraghavan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan J U D G M E N T (Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue callingin question the correctness of the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated23.2.2007 made in ITA No.1528/Mds/2003, by raising the followingsubstantial questions of law: "(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in holding that theinterest income from UK Company should only be taxedon receipt basis, when the assessee was following amercantile system of accounting? https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in holding thatexpenditure on market research, due diligencereport, etc., incurred even prior to the investmentin shares of the foreign company should be treatedas a business expenditure?" 2. When the matter is taken up for admission, the learnedStanding Counsel brought to our notice the Circular instructionissued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide CircularNo.3/2018 dated 11.7.2018 wherein it is stipulated that appealsshall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the HighCourt in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.50 lakhs. 3. In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the appeal filedby the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed, keeping open thesubstantial questions of law for determination in an appropriatecase. s/d- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrarssk.To 1. The Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras 'C' Bench Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) VI 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road Chennai 34 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle IV(6) Chennai 6 TC No.405 of 2008 RSI(CO) SP(21/01/2019)