Commissioner Of Income Tax,Chennai v. M/S.mgm Transport Pvt. Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATE: 02.03.2021 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai.... Appellant in all TCAs/Respondent Vs. M/s.MGM Transport Pvt. Ltd.,189, Waltax Road,Chennai – 600 003. ... Respondent in all TCAs/Appellant Appeals preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras, "B" Bench, dated 25.02.2013 in I.TA.Nos.1282, 1283 &567/Mds/2011 Assessment Year 2005-06, 2008-09 & 2007-08, asagainst the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-V,Chennai in ITA No.230/09-10 dated 27.12.2010, ITA No.424/10-11dated 20.04.2011 and ITA No.161/10-11, dated 21.04.2011 for theAssessment Year 2007-2008, 2008-09 and 2005-2006 respectively asagainst the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income TaxCompany Circle-IV(2) Chennai in PAN No.AACM5458M, dated31.12.2010, 23.12.2010 and 10.12.2009 for the Assessment Years2008-2009, 2007-2008 and 2005-2006 respectively. For Appellant : Mr.Karthick Ranganathan,(in all TCAs) Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent : Mr.R.Janakiraman (in all TCAs) We have heard Mr.Karthick Ranganathan, learned SeniorStanding Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.R.Janakiraman,learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. 2.The appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainst the order dated 25.02.2013 made in I.TA.Nos.1282, 1283 & https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 567/Mds/2011 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Chennai, "B" Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for theAssessment Year 2005-06, 2008-09 & 2007-08. 3.The appeals were admitted on 06.08.2014 on the followingsubstantial questions of law: “1)Whether under the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunalwas right in holding that the assessee was liableto deduct tax at source on the hire chargespayments to sister concern as per netting formulaquo payments made in furtherance to cross hiringengagement of vehicles with its sister concernfor the purpose of application of Section 40(a)(ia)? 2)Whether on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal wascorrect in deciding that the shortfall in taxdeduction at source does not attract disallowanceunder Section 40 (a)(ia)? 3)Whether on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal wasright in holding that the provisions of Section40(a)(ia) will not apply to belated payments oftax deduction at source made before the due datefor filing of return of income?” 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 08.08.2019 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 these cases areless than the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax CaseAppeals are dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low TaxEffect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open.In the event the tax effect in this case 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(CS IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar va To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, "B" Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-V, Chennai. 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle (IV), Chennai.T.C.A.Nos.154 to 156 of 2014ppa[co]srg 22/03/2021