The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.wheels India Ltd., Padi, Chennai - 600 050

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 27.08.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMandThe Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.572 of 2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai....Appellant/RespondentVs M/s.Wheels India Ltd.,Padi, Chennai - 600 050....Respondent/Appellant APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 14.03.2014 made in ITA.No.43/MDS/2010 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench forthe assessment year 2006-07 against the order of Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals) Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai in ITANo.32/08-09 LTU(A) dated 30.11.2009 against the Assessment orderof the Commissioner of Income Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit Chennaiin GI No/PAN AAACNo315K dated 17/11/08. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC and Ms.R.Hemalatha, SSCFor Respondent: Mr.R.Venkatanarayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J.) We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel, and Ms.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counselappearing for the appellant/revenue and Mr.R.Venkatanarayanan,learned counsel for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabahan, learnedcounsel 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 dated14.03.2014 made in ITA.No.43/MDS/2010 on the file of the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench for the assessmentyear 2006-07. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The appeal was admitted on 27.07.2015 on the followingsubstantial questions of law : “i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunalwas right in entertaining additional grounds on theissue of disallowance of loan arising from salestax liability which does not arise out of order ofthe CIT(A) nor the assessment order? ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunalwas right in law in holding that the differencebetween sales tax loan amount and the amount paidon net present value basis under sales tax deferralscheme of the Maharashtra Government is not aremission of liability under Section 41(1) of theIncome Tax Act?" 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(CS-III) cse //True copy//Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai. Taxpayer Unit, Chennai. 4. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Large, Tax Payer Unit, Chennai. Tax Payer Unit, Chennai. +1cc to Mr.T.Ravikumar, Advocate SR.No.73345 +1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan, Advocate SR.No.73638 TCA.No.572 of 2015PVS(CO)GMY(06/11/2019)