The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.caplin Point Laboratories Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai.... Appellant/AppellantVs. M/s.Caplin Point Laboratories Ltd.,No.3, Narbavi Lakshmanan Street,T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017.... Respondent/Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras, “D” Bench, dated 31.01.2014 in I.T.A.No.667/Mds/2013,Assessment Year 2009-10 preferred against the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax Appeals-IX, Chennai-34, Dated27/12/2012 made in I.T.A.No.171 of 2011 to 2012 inGIR.No./PAN.No. filed against the Assessment Order ofthe Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle-1(3),chennai-34 Dated 17/11/2011 for the Assessment year 2009 to 2010. JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.Vikram Vijayaraghavanfor M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan, learned counsel for therespondent/assessee. 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed againstthe order dated 31.01.2014 made in I.TA.No.667/Mds/2013 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “D” Bench(for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2009-10.3.The above appeal has been admitted on the followingsubstantial questions of law : https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ “1.Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal was rightin allowing MAT credit of the amalgamatingcompany to be carried forward and given credit inthe hands of the amalgamated company?2.Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad,especially when section 115JAA is a selfcontained code an there is no provision to allowcredit of the amalgamating entity in the hands ofthe amalgamated entity as in Section 72A?”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 08.08.2019 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 CaseAppeal is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low TaxEffect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open.In the event the tax effect in this case is above the thresholdlimit fixed in the said Circular, liberty is granted to theRevenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal tobe heard and decided on merits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) mkn //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To1. The Assistant Registrar, The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “D” Bench 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals-IX, Chennai-34. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle-1(3), Chennai-34. +1cc to Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.33796 +1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar, Advocate, S.R.No.33789 RSI(CO)HS(09/08/2021) T.C.A.No.848 of 2014