Tca/660/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Teledata Marine Solutions

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 02.11.2018 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.660 of 2014 The Commissioner of Income-tax,Chennai. .... Appellant-vs- M/s.Teledata Marine Solutions Limited,(formerly Sirus Shipping Company Ltd.)Teledata Tower,No.37/1, Velacherry,Tambaram Main Road,Velacherry, Chennai-600 034.... Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate TribunalChennai “A” Bench, dated 16.06.2011 in I.T.A.No.95/Mds/2011, forthe assessment year 2003-04, as against the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-V, Chennai-34 dated21/10/2010 in I.T.A.No.161/2008-09 in PAN/GIR No. forthe Assessment Year 2003-04 against the Assistant Commissionerof Income Tax VI(2) Chennai-34 in No.147/143(3) dated 12/12/2018. For Appellant:Mr.M.Swaminathan,Senior Standing Counseland Ms.V.Pushpa,Junior Standing Counsel JUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal, by the appellant/Revenue, is directed againstthe order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai “A”Bench, dated 16.06.2011 in I.T.A.No.95/Mds/2011, for theassessment year 2003-04. 2.Heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counseland Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Junior Standing Counsel for the Revenue. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The above appeal has been admitted on 17.11.2014, on thefollowing substantial questions of law:-“(i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal was rightin upholding the order passed by the Commissionerof Income Tax (Appeals) who had deleted theaddition of Rs.86.60 Lakhs made by the AssessingOfficer disallowing the claim of deduction underSection 33AC of the Income Tax Act?(ii) Whether the assessee is entitled todeduction under Section 33AC of the Income Tax Acteven if he does no own a ship while claimingdeduction?” 4.We have perused the order of assessment as well as theorder passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and we find thatthe tax effect in this appeal is lesser than the threshold limitmentioned in Circular No.3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, issued bythe Central Board of Direct Taxes, which fixes the monetarylimit as Rs.50,00,000/- for the Department to pursue the matter.Furthermore, the Revenue has not been able to point out anydistinguishing features, by which the Circular No.3 of 2018,dated 11.07.2018, cannot be applied. 5.Thus, for the above reasons, the Revenue cannot pursuethis appeal in view of the low tax effect. Hence, this appealis dismissed and the substantial questions of law, framed forconsideration, are left open. The Revenue is at liberty to seekfor restoration of appeal if at a later point of time, it isfound that the tax effect is above the threshold limit or tofall under the exceptional clauses mentioned in the Circular.No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai “A” Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-V 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai 600 036. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai 600 036. 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax VI (2), Chennai-34. Chennai-34. 4.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. Chennai. +1cc to M/S.M.Swaminathan, Advocate Sr.76133 T.C.A.No.660 of 2014 spd[co]srg 18/12/2018