The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Chennai v. M/S.covanta (Madurai) Operating P Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA T.C.A.No.515 of 2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai.... Appellant Vs. M/s.Covanta (Madurai) Operating P Ltd.101, 4[th] Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, Adyar,Chennai – 600 020.... Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras, “B” Bench, dated 25.02.2015 in I.TA.No.714/Mds/2014,Assessment Year 2003-04. This appeal filed against TheCommissioner of Income Tax(A)(C)-II, Chennai in ITA.No.394/13-14, dated 29/10/2013 PAN.No: in Assessment year 2003-2004 against the Assessment year 2003-2004 against the AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax Company Circle-I(3), ChennaiPAN.No:AAACO5538L in Assessment year 2003-2004. For Respondent : Mr.M.Kaushik for Mr.S.Sridhar JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.M.Kaushik forMr.S.Sridhar, learned counsel for the respondent/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 25.02.2015 made in I.TA.No.714/Mds/2014 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “B” Bench(for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2003-04. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The appeal was admitted on 28.07.2015 on the followingsubstantial questions of law:“1.Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunalwas right in deleting the penalty levied underSection 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act? 2.Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad bydeleting the penalty especially when the assesseehad deliberately claimed deduction under Section80IA for which he was not entitled to and hadthus furnished inaccurate particulars of incomewhich amounts to concealment?” 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-VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mkn To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “B” Bench Chennai, “B” Bench 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax,(A)(C)II, Chennai. Chennai. 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle 1(3) Chennai-600 034.+1cc to Mr.T.Ravikumar, Advocate, S.R.No.30326+1cc to Mr.Sridhar, Advocate, S.R.No.30331 T.C.A.No.515 of 2015 VSN-II(CO)CB(23/07/2021)