Whether, On The Facts Andcircumstances Of The Case, The Income Taxappellate Tribunal Was Correct In Allowingcredit For The Tax Paid Under Section 90 Ofthe Incom v. True Copy

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM The Honourable Mrs.Justice PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA The Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle, Chennai ...AppellantVsC.Nedumudikilli ...Respondent Prayer: APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the common order dated 16.6.2011 made respectively inITA.Nos.958 to 960/ Mds/2010 on the file of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench for the assessment yearsfrom 2001-02 to 2003-04 preferred against the Commisssioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals)-I, Chennai, dated 26.02.2010, made inITA.Nos.174 to 176/08-09, against the order of the DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-IV(1), Chennai, dated29.12.2008, made in PAN/GIR.No. , for the assessmentyears 2001-2002, 2002-2003 and 2003-2004. COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J) We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counselappearing for the appellant – Revenue and Mr.R.Kumar, learnedcounsel appearing for the respondent – assessee. 2. These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, the Act), are directedagainst the common order dated 16.6.2011 made respectively inITA.Nos.958 to 960/ Mds/2010 on the file of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench (for short, the Tribunal)for the assessment years from 2001-02 to 2003-04. 3. The appeals were admitted on 10.3.2014 on the followingsubstantial questions of law : https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ “1. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was correct in allowingcredit for the tax paid under Section 90 ofthe Income Tax Act before calculatinginterest under Section 234B despite the factthat there was no provision for the sameduring the relevant period ? 2. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was correct in allowingcredit for the tax paid under Section 90 ofthe Income Tax Act before computing interestunder Section 234B applying the ratio in thecase of CIT Vs. Chemplast Sunmar Ltd.[reported in 314 ITR 231] despite the factthat the issue discussed with regard tocredit under Section 115JAA of the IncomeTax Act ? and3. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was correct in allowingcredit for the tax paid under Section 90 ofthe Income Tax Act before computing interestunder Section 234B despite the fact that theamendment to Section 234B by the FinanceAct, 2006 has been made applicable onlyafter 01.4.2007?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeals are 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 the respectivecases is less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above tax caseappeals are dismissed on account of the low tax effect. Thesubstantial questions of law framed are left open. In the eventthe tax effect in the respective cases is above the thresholdlimit fixed in the said circular, liberty is granted to theRevenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appealsto be heard and decided on merits. No costs. Sd/- //True Copy// Assistant Registrar Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-I, Chennai 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-IV(1), Chennai. Central Circle-IV(1), Chennai. TCA.Nos.775 to 777 of 2013 SSV (CO)RV (04/09/2020)