The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltu, Chennai v. M/S.areva T&D India Ltd., Chennai-43

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.8.2019 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMANDTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN The Commissioner of Income Tax, LTU, Chennai...Appellant/ Respondent VsM/s.Areva T&D India Ltd.,Chennai-43....Respondent/ Appellant APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 21.6.2011 made in ITA.No.800/Mds/2010 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench forthe assessment year 2004-05 against the Orders of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Large Tax Payer unit atChennai dated 09.03.10 and 10.03.2010 made in ITA No.902/06-07LTU(A) against the Order made in PAN No.AY1-061/AAACG 2115R,dated 29.12.2006 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of IncomeTax, Company Circle I(1), Chennai -34. For Appellant : Mrs.R.Hemalatha, SSC For Respondent : Mr.M.P.Senthilkumar Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior StandingCounsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue andMr.M.P.Senthilkumar, learned counsel appearing for therespondent – assessee. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated21.6.2011 made in ITA.No. 800/Mds/2010 on the file of the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench for the assessmentyear 2004-05. 3. The appeal was admitted on 23.1.2012 on the followingsubstantial question of law :-“Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in directing https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the Assessing Officer to allow the claim fordeduction of excise duty to the extent thesame had been paid before the due date forfiling the return of income without givingany supporting reasons and without notingthat the entire excise duty had been debitedin the books and claiming the same onceagain in the memo of income without addingback the excise duty unpaid as on 31.3.2004for income tax purposes amounted to doubleallowance of the same expenditure ?” 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 question of law framed is 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// To1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench.,Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-LTU, Chennai. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle -I(1), Chennai -34. +1cc to Mr.Philip George,Advocate, SR.No.71128+1cc to Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, Advocate, SR.No.70547 Kak(15/10/2019) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/