The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.hallmark Engineers, Chennai-37

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 21.8.2019 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMANDTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN TAX CASE APPEAL No.216 of 2013 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai...Appellant/ Respondent Vs M/s.Hallmark Engineers, Chennai-37....Respondent/ Appellant APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 26.7.2012 made in ITA.No.80/Mds/2011 on the fileof the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for theassessment year 2007-08 against the Order passed by theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XII, Chennai, made in ITANo.140/09-10 dated 22.11.2010 against the Order of the IncomeTax Officer Ward -XIII (3), Chennai -34 in PA/GA.AADFH3582 Kdated 22.12.2009 for the Assessment Year 2007-08. For Appellant: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, SSC For Respondent: Mr.N.Devanathan Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue andMr.N.Devanathan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent –assessee. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated26.7.2012 made in ITA.No. 80/Mds/2011 on the file of the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessmentyear 2007-08. 3. The appeal was admitted on 03.6.2013 on the followingsubstantial questions of law : “i. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in holding that as per Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, the amounts that https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ remained paid as on 31.3.2007 would beentitled for the deduction and the balanceamounts for which tax was not deducted atsource as on the end of the financial yearalone can be disallowed ? and ii. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in holding that the provisions ofSection 40(a)(ia) have no application withrespect to the payments made during thefinancial year ?” 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 08.8.2019 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 this case is lessthan the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above tax caseappeal is 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 appeal to be heard and decided onmerits. No costs. RS Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench, Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XII, Chennai. 3. The Income Tax Officer Ward -XIII (3), Chennai -34. +1cc to Mr.N.Devanathan, Advocate, SR.No.71120 TCA.No.216 of 2013 Kak(12/11/2019)