The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Chennai v. M/S.rane Brake Linings Ltd,“Maithri”

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 05.12.2018 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR Tax Case Appeal No.470 of 2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai. ...Appellant -vs- M/s.Rane Brake Linings Ltd,“Maithri”, 132, Cathedral Road,Chennai – 600 086. ...Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai dated 21.04.2011 in ITA No.104/Mds/2009, for the Assessment year 2003-04. against the Orderof the Income Tax Officer (OSD) Company circle – V (3), Chennai– 34 dated 27/03/2006 made in PA/GIR.No. AAACRI703L/53036-Ragainst the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) –V, Chennai-34, dated 04/06/2008 made in ITA.No. 173/2006-074515/2006-07. For Appellant:Mrs.R.HemalathaSenior Standing CounselFor Respondent:Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabanand Ramamani JUDGMENT[Judgement of the Court was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.] This Tax Case Appeal is filed under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai dated 21.04.2011 inITA No. 104/Mds/2009, for the Assessment year 2003-04. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.Heard Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counselfor the Revenue and Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan, learned Counsel forthe assessee. 3.This Appeal has been admitted on 02.01.2012, on thefollowing Substantial Question of Law: "Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal was right in holdingthat the deduction under Section 80HHC has tobe allowed without allowing deduction underSection 80-IB?” 4.We have perused the order of Assessment as well as theOrder passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and we find thatthe tax effect in this appeal is lesser than the threshold limitmentioned in Circular No.3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, issued bythe Central Board of Direct Taxes, which fixes the monetarylimit as Rs.50,00,000/- for the Department to pursue the matter.Furthermore, the Revenue has not been able to point out anydistinguishing features, by which the Circular No.3 of 2018,dated 11.07.2018, cannot be applied. 5.Thus, for the above reasons, the Revenue cannot pursuethis Appeal in view of the low tax effect. Hence, the Appeal isdismissed and the Substantial Question of Law, framed forconsideration, is left open. No costs. The Revenue is atliberty to seek for restoration of appeal, if at a later pointof time, it is found that the tax effect is above the thresholdlimit. Sd/-Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mrm/abr To 1.Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai 'A' Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – V, 121, Mahatma Gandhi road, Chennai 34. 121, Mahatma Gandhi road, Chennai 34. 3. The Income Tax Officer( OSD), Company Circle V (3), Chennai 34. Company Circle V (3), Chennai 34. +1cc to Mr.Subbaraya Aiyar, Advocate, S.R.No. 84138 +1cc to Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No. 83860 T.C.A.No.470 of 2011 NM(CO)GN(02/01/2019)