The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.mrf Ltd., Chennai-6

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA Tax Case Appeal No.1121 of 2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai ...Appellant/Respondent Vs M/s.MRF Ltd., Chennai-6 ...Respondent/Appellant APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 13.5.2015 made in ITA.No.521/Mds/2014 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench forthe assessment year 2009-10. ITA.No.521/mds/2014 against theCommission of Income Tax(Appeals) Large Tax Payer Unit, Chennai-600101 in FBTA No.7/11-12/LTU(A) order dated 19/12/2013 in GINo./PAN NO- for the Assessment year large Tax PayerUnit, Chennai order dated 16/12/2011 in GI No./PA No.-AAACM4154G for the Assessment year 2009-2010. For Appellant:Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC & Mrs.R.Hemalatha, SSC For Respondent:Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan for M/s.Subbarayar Aiyer Padmanabhan Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learnedSenior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenueand Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, learned counsel appearing on behalf ofM/s.Subbaraya Aiyer Padmanabhan, learned counsel on record forthe respondent. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainst the order dated 13.5.2015 made in ITA.No.521/Mds/2014 on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench(for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2009-10. 3. The appeal has been admitted on 08.12.2015 on thefollowing substantial questions of law :“1. Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in deleting the additions made by theAO under Section 115WB(1) under the FringeBenefit Tax? 2. Is not the finding of the Tribunal badas it is against the Rule of consistencyespecially when the decision for the earlierasst years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 hadbeen decided in favour of the department buthad deviated from the same in the presentasst. year especially when there is nochange in the circumstances? And3.Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal was right inholding the provisions of Sec.115WB(2) and115WB(3) are not applicable especially whenthe basis of taxation for Fringe Benefit hasbeen clarified in Board Circular No.8 of2005?" 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. Sd/- Assistant Registrar Sub Assistant Registrar 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench. 2. The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Large Tax Payer Unit, Chennai-600 101. Large Tax Payer Unit, Chennai-600 101. 3. The Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax, Large Tax Payer, Chennai. Large Tax Payer, Chennai. TCA.No.1121 of 2015 RJI (CO)RV (03/09/2020)