Commissioner Of Income Tax,Chennai v. M/S.sundaram Clayton Ltd.,Jayalakshmi Estates

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.68 of 2017 Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai... Appellant -vs- M/s.Sundaram Clayton Ltd.,Jayalakshmi Estates,29, Haddows Road,Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 006.PAN: .. RespondentAppeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961,againsttheorderdated19.08.2015,madeinI.T.A.No.2612/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2010-11, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal-VI, Chennai-34 dated 30/07/2014 and made in ITA No.1417/13-14/A-VI for the Assessment Year 2010-11, against the order of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax,Company Range VI, Chennai-34 dated 28/03/2013 and made in PANAAACS4920J for the Assessment year 2010-11. For Appellant:Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel :assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, Standing Counsel For Respondent :Mr.R.Venkatanarayana, for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar, Padmanabhan & Ramamani https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ JUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome-tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated19.08.2015, made in I.T.A.No.2612/Mds/2014 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai for theassessment year 2010-11. 2.The appeal has been filed raising the following substantialquestion of law:-“Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case and on the grounds raised herein, theTribunal was right in holding that the interestexpenditure of Rs.2.67 cr cannot be excluded fromthe exempt income as per Section 14A r/w Rr 8D?” 3.Heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counselassisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel for theappellant – and Mr.R.Venkatanarayana, learned counsel, forM/s.Subbaraya Aiyar, Padmanabhan & Ramamani, for the respondent. 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.17/2019,dated 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 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 question of law framed is 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(CS V) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar abr To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai. Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-VI, Chennai-34. 3.The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Range-Vi, Chennai-34. 4.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. +1cc to Mr.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanaban, Advocate Sr.75146 +1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate Sr.75134 T.C.A.No.68 of 2017 sv[co]srg 11/11/2019