Commissioner Of Income Tax,Corporate Circle 3, Chennai v. M/S.ttk Healthcare Limited

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.213 of 2017 Commissioner of Income Tax,Corporate Circle 3, Chennai... Appellant -vs- M/s.TTK Healthcare Limited,No.6, Cathedral Road,Chennai-600 006.PAN: AABCT 3312 J.. RespondentAppeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961,againsttheorderdated08.09.2016,madeinI.T.A.No.1921/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai for the assessmentyear 2005-06 against the order of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax Appeals II,121,Mahatma Gandhi Road, chennai 34dated 28.03.2016 in ITA.NO.674/CIT (A) 11/2013-2014 PANNO.AA BCT 3312 J for the Assessment Year 2005-2006 andagainst the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax CompanyCircle III,(2) chennai 34 dated 28.03.2013 GIR/PAN NO. AABCT 3312 J for the Assessment Year 2005-2006 respectively. For Appellant:Mr.M.Swaminathan,Senior Standing Counselassisted by Ms.V.PushpaStanding Counsel For Respondent :Mr.R.Venkatanarayana, For M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan & Ramamani****** JUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income-tax Act, 1961 is directed against the orderdated 08.09.2016, made in I.T.A.No.1921/Mds/2016 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench,Chennai for the assessment year 2005-06. 2.The appeal has been admitted on 07.04.2017, on thefollowing substantial question of law:-“Whether on the facts and circumstances ofthe case and in law, the Tribunal was rightand justified in holding that logo chargespaid by the assessee were revenue in natureeven though such payment was continuouslymade for several years and the assessee gotenduring benefit?” 3.Heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counselfor the appellant – and Mr.R.Venkatanarayana, learnedcounsel, for M/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 Revenueon 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 thetax effect in this case is less than the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above taxcase appeal is dismissed on account of the low tax effect.The substantial question of law framed is left open. In theevent the tax effect is above the threshold limit fixed inthe said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue tomake a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to beheard and decided on merits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar abr To 1.THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, CHENNAI. 2.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS II,121,MAHATMAGANDHI ROAD, CHENNAI 34GANDHI ROAD, CHENNAI 34 3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CHENNAI 34 +1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan , Advocate SR.No. 75041 +1cc to Mr.M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar , Advocate SR.No. 75145 T.C.A.No.213 of 2017 ad (CO)A.SK(25/11/2019)