Commissioner Of Income Tax,Corporate Circle 3,Chennai v. M/S.trio Shipping Services Private Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.01.2021 The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMandThe Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA Commissioner of Income Tax,Corporate Circle 3,Chennai. ...Appellant/Respondent Vs M/s.Trio Shipping Services Private Limited,No.34, Gopal Street,T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.PAN: ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 22.03.2019 made in ITA.No.1779/Chny/2018 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennaifor the assessment year 2011-12, againstthe order passed by theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Chennai-34 dated01/03/2018 made in ITA No.14/CIT (A)-13/2011-12 and against theorder passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CompanyCircle III(2), Chennai dated 20.03.2014 made in GIRNo./PAN. for Assessment Year 2011-12. For Respondent:M/s.Harshni Jyothiraman This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed againstthe order 22.03.2019 made in ITA.No.1779/Chny/2018 on the fileof the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai (forbrevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2011-12. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The appellant was admitted on 08.08.2019 on the followingsubstantial questions of law for consideration:“i.Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in deleting theaddition made under Section 37(1) by holdingthat the commission payments were notdoubted by the Lower Authorities, when thesame was doubted by both the AssessingOfficer and the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)? ii.Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in deleting thecommission payment made by the assessee tothe tune of Rs.1,60,50,000/- under Section37(1) when the assessee could not produceany evidence for the justification of thepayment?” 3. We have heard M/s.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel forthe Appellant – Revenue and M/s.Harshni Jyothiraman, learnedcounsel appearing for the respondent. 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for theappellant submits that the above appeal is not pursued by theRevenue on 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 the taxeffect in this case is less than 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 questions of law framed are left open. In the eventthe tax effect is above the threshold limit fixed in the saidcircular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to file a petitionbefore this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decidedon merits. No costs. Sub Assistant Registrar cse To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai.2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-3, Chennai.3.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals (13), Chennai-34.4.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle, II(2), Chenani.+1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate Sr.2442TCA.No.566 of 2019ca[co]srg 09/02/2021