The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Chennai v. Sundaram Brake Linings Ltd.,B-I, M.t.h.road,Padi, Chennai-600 050

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN The Commissioner of Income-tax,Chennai... Appellant -vs- Sundaram Brake Linings Ltd.,B-I, M.T.H.Road,Padi, Chennai-600 050.PAN: .. RespondentAppeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961,againsttheorderdated27.11.2015,madeinI.T.A.No.1175/Mds/2015 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2010-11. Appeal against the order dated 23.02.2016 made inITA.No.283/CIT(A)-15/14-15 on the file of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax(Appeals)-15, Chennai -34, for the assessment year2010-11. Appeal against the order dated 23.03.2015 made inPAN.No.AADCS4888E on the file of the Deputy Commissioner ofIncome Tax Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai -34 for the Assessmentyear 2010-11. For Appellant:Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar,Senior Standing Counselassisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani,Standing Counsel For Respondent :Mr.R.Venkatanarayana, For M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar, Padmanabhan & Ramamani, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ JUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome-tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated27.11.2015, made in I.T.A.No.1175/Mds/2015 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for theassessment year 2010-11. 2.The appeal has been admitted on 30.01.2018, on thefollowing substantial questions of law:-“(i) Whether the Tribunal erred in law indeletingthedisallowancetowardsexportcommission paid to the non-resident withoutdeduction of tax at source (TDS)? (ii) Whether the expenditure on payment in thenature of fee for technical services is liable tobe disallowed under Section 40(a)(ia) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 when such payment is madewithout deduction of tax at source? And (iii) Whether the Assessing Officer has toestablish the existence of business connection ofthe assessee for determination of liability todeduct tax at source?” 3.Heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counselassisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel for theappellant – and Mr.R.Venkatanarayana, learned counsel, forM/s.Subbaraya Aiyar, Padmanabhan & Ramamani, for the respondent. 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.17/2019,dated 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 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 to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided onmerits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) -15,121 Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam,Chennai -34. 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai -34. +1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar, Advocate SR.No.75136+1cc to M/s.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Advocate Sr.No.75121AKM/14.11.19/3P-6C/ T.C.A.No.767 of 2017