Tax Case Appeal v. M/S.ambur Shoes

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDated: 27.07.2016 C O R A M The Honourable Mr.Justice S.MANIKUMAR and The Honourable Mr.Justice D.KRISHNAKUMAR Tax Case Appeal No.407 of 2016The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai...Appellant/RespondentVsM/s.Ambur Shoes,No.10, Vepery High Road,Periamet,Chennai - 600 003...Respondent/Appellant M/s.Ambur Shoes,No.10, Vepery High Road,Periamet,Chennai - 600 003PAN:AABFA1495L Prayer : Appeal filed against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai dated 02.06.2015in ITA No.674/Mds/2015 (Assessment Year 2011-12). As against theorder passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5Chennai in Appeal NO.ITA.No.97/13-14 Dated of Order 10/03/2015for the Assessment year 2011-2012 as against the order passed bythe Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle X, Chennai-06 inPAN/No.AABFA1495L Dated 29/01/2014 for the Assessment years2011-2012. For appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar Sr. Standing Counsel for Income Tax.For respondent : Mr.R.Venkatanarayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar J U D G M E N T (Judgment of the Court was made by S.Manikumar,J) This Appeal has been filed against the order of the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 02.06.2015 inITA No.674/Mds/2015 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The substantial questions of law raised in the instantappeal are:- "1. Whether in the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal was right in allowing thededuction of expenses incurred by the assesseetowards overseas selling commission when the assesseehad failed to deduct tax at source u/s.195 on thesame? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal is right in not considering theeffect of Explanation to Sec.9 inserted by FinanceAct, 2010 whereby income received by a non-residentfor technical services is deemed to accrue in Indiairrespective of whether the non-resident has anestablishment in the country and whether the non-resident had rendered the service outside India orIndia? 3. Is not the finding of the Tribunal that theexpenses incurred by the assessee for a servicerendered by a non-resident outside India andtherefore not liable to deduction of Tax at Sourcecontrary to the provisions of the Statute, i.e.Explanation to Sec.9 of the Income Tax Act, perverseand wrong?" 3. Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel forIncome Tax submitted that the tax implication in the instantappeal is less than the ceiling limit fixed by the Circularbearing No.21 of 2015, dated 10.12.2015. He further submittedthat as per the Circular, Tax Case Appeals have been instructedto be withdrawn, subject to the matters covered under thecircular and there is no audit objection also. 4. Placing on record the above submissions, whiledismissing the Tax Case Appeal No.407 of 2016, as withdrawn,substantial questions of law raised are left open. No costs. -s/d- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The Commissioner of Income TaxChennai 2.The Income-Tax Appellate TribunalMadras 'B' Bench, Chennai 3.The Commisioner of Income tax(Appeal)-5 Chennai-34 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income TaxCircle-X, Chennai-06 5.The Assistant RegistrarIncome Tax Appellate TribunalRajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar Chennai +1 cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan Advocate sr 42845 +1 cc to M/s.J.Ravi kumar Senior Standing Counselfor I.T.P. sr.42451 Tax Case Appeal No.407 of 2016 aa17/08/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/