Tca/595/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.beach Minerals Company

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 26.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal Nos.595 and 596 of 2014 The Commissioner of Income tax,Chennai... Appellant in both Appeals-vs- M/s.Beach Minerals Company Pvt. Ltd.,BMC House, No.32/2, Halls Road,Egmore, Chennai-600 008... Respondent in both Appeals APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the common order dated 25.06.2013, made in I.T.A.Nos.603& 263/Mds/2012 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2007-08 and againstthe Order dated 30.12.2011 passed by the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals)-III, Chennai made in ITA No.539/09-10/A-III for the Assessment Year 2007-08 and as against the Orderdated 31.12.2009, passed by the Asst.Commissioner of Income TaxChennai, for the Assessment Year 2007-08 in GIR/PAN : AADCB3450 D For Appellant:Mr.T.Ravikumar,(In both Appeals)Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent :Ms.Sree Lakshmi Valli,(In both Appeals)For M/s.Surasika Parthasarathy COMMON JUDGMENT(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) These appeals filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome-tax Act, 1961 are directed against the common order dated25.06.2013, made in I.T.A.Nos.603 & 263/Mds/2012 on the file ofthe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for theassessment year 2007-08. 2.The appeals were admitted on 08.12.2014, on the followingsubstantial questions of law:-“T.C.A.No.595 of 2014:-Whether on the facts and in the circumstances https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of the case, the Tribunal was right in holdingthat the shipment expenses, ship freight, terminalhandling charges and insurance charges in allamounting to Rs.3,68,53,047/- to be excluded fromthe export turnover and also from the totalturnover while quantifying the deduction underSection 10B?T.C.A.No.596 of 2014:- Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal was right in reducingthe disallowance made under Section 14A of theIncomeTaxActfromRs.69,17,637/-toRs.55,00,000/- without any logical or rationalbasis?” 3.Heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel forthe appellant – and M/s.Surasika Parthasarathy, learned counselfor the respondent. 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeals are 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 caseappeals are 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 appeals to be heard and decided onmerits. No costs. To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench,Chennai. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals-III), Chennai. 3. The Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai. +1cc to Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, Advocate, SR.No. 72370 +1cc to M/s.Sree Lakshmivalli, Advocate, SR.No.73051 T.C.A.Nos.595 and 596 of 2014 Kak(07/11/2019)