Case LawHigh Court › Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3,...

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Coimbatore v. M/S.kob Medical Textiles Pvt. Ltd.,Palladam

High Court 06 Jul 2020 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Coimbatore v. M/S.kob Medical Textiles Pvt. Ltd.,Palladam
Date of order
06 Jul 2020
Assessment year(s)
2010-11
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Coimbatore v. M/S.kob Medical Textiles Pvt. Ltd.,Palladam, the High Court (2020) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.576 of 2017 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Coimbatore Vs M/s.KOB Medical Textiles Pvt. Ltd.,Palladam. ...Appellant ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 09.3.2017 made in ITA.No.855/Mds/2015 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench forthe assessment year 2010-11 against the order of DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax – circle-2, Tirupur dated 30.01.2015in PA No.GIR No.AABCK2679R and the order of Income Taxation,Chennai and Secretary to the Dispute Resolution Panel, Chennai,dated 29/12/2014 in F.No.DRP/CHE/48/2014-15, and JointCommissioner of Income Tax, Transfer Pricing Officer -II i/c,Chennai, dated 28/01/2014 in F.No.4-207/PPO-II/AY 2010-11 For Appellant: Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC & Ms.K.G.Usharani, SC For Respondent: Mr.Ashokpathy for M/s.Pass Association Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel and Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel appearingfor the appellant – Revenue and Mr.Ashokpathy, learned counselappearing for the respondent. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainst the order dated 09.3.2017 made in ITA.No.855/Mds/2015 onthe file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench(for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2010-11. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The appeal has been admitted on 07.12.2017 on thefollowing substantial questions of law :“i. Whether the Appellate Tribunal isright in law in holding that the assessee iseligible for claim of deduction underSection 10B of the Income Tax Act from theassessment year 2001-02 to assessment year2010-11, when Section 10B provides anundertaking begins to manufacture or producearticles or things is eligible to claimdeduction and the assessee began tomanufacture on 27.3.2000 as certified by theauditor and hence, the deduction underSection 10B is available to the assesseefrom the assessment year 2000-01 toassessment year 2009-10 only ? and(ii) Whether the Appellate Tribunal isright in granting risk adjustments on ad hocbasis when the pre-requisites of Rule 10C(2)(e) are not complied with by the assesseeand not provided requisite informationpertained to the claim ?” 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.17/2019dated 08.8.2019 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 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 make a mention tothis Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided onmerits. No costs. Sd/-Assistant Registrar(CS-I)//True copy//Sub Assistant Registrar RS https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench. 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-27, Tirupur Tirupur 3. The Income Tax Officer,(Hqrs) i/c, International Taxation, Chennai. International Taxation, Chennai. Secretary to the Dispute Resolution Panel, Chennai 4. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Transfer Pricing Officer, II, i/c, Chennai. Transfer Pricing Officer, II, i/c, Chennai. Sd/-Assistant Registrar(CS-I)//True copy//Sub Assistant Registrar RS https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench. 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-27, Tirupur Tirupur 3. The Income Tax Officer,(Hqrs) i/c, International Taxation, Chennai. International Taxation, Chennai. Secretary to the Dispute Resolution Panel, Chennai 4. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Transfer Pricing Officer, II, i/c, Chennai. Transfer Pricing Officer, II, i/c, Chennai. 5. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Coimbatore. TCA.No.576 of 2017 RSV(CO)GMY(09/09/2020)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan