The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.atlas Metal Processors Pvt. Ltd., Chennai-119

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai....Appellant /AppellantVs M/s.Atlas Metal Processors Pvt.Ltd., Chennai-119...Respondent/Respondent APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the common order dated 09.10.2015 made in ITA.Nos.1502and 1503/Mds/2015 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench respectively for the assessmentyears 2010-11 and 2011-12. Against the Common Order dated 23/03/2015 made in ITA.No.150/13-14/A-1 New ITA.265/CIT (A) 1/2013-14 and ITA .No. 127/14-15/A-1 New No.ITA. 222/CIT (A) – 1/2014-15 on the file of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -I, Chennai respectivelyfor the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 against the order11.03.2011 and 18.03.2014 made in GIR / PAN: AAACA741G and AAACA7401 Q on the file of the Income Tax Officer, Company Ward – I(i), Chennai – 34 respectively for the assessment years 2010-2011 and 2011-12. For Appellant:Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, SSC We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learnedSenior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue. 2. These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961, are directed against the common order https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ dated 09.10.2015 made in ITA.Nos.1502 and 1503/Mds/2015 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Benchrespectively for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12.3. The appeals was admitted on 12.7.2016 on the followingsubstantial questions of law : “i. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in dismissing the departmental appealwithout appreciating the fact that no newundertaking was set up by the assessee,which is contrary to the provisions ofSection 10B ?ii. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in allowing deduction under Section10B of the Income Tax Act? andiii. Is not the finding of the Tribunalperverse especially when no new unit wasformed by the assessee and the claim madewas on account of transfer of assets fromold DTA unit, on which, the assessee hadalready claimed 80IA deduction ?” 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.17/2019dated 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 the respectivecases is less than 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 in the respective cases is above the thresholdlimit fixed in the said circular, liberty is granted to theRevenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appealsto be heard and decided on merits. Sd/-Assistant Registrar (CS-VIII)//True Copy// Rs To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench. Chennai 'D' Bench. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. Chennai. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) -1, Chennai. (Appeals) -1, Chennai. 4.Income Tax Officer, Company Ward – I (1), Chennai – 34. +1cc to Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.75258 RS TCA.Nos.432 & 433 of 2016 VBA(CO)GN(18/11/2019)