COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IV vs. M/S. M.M. FORGINGS LTD.,

T.C.A.No.109 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 26.08.2022 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.No.109 of 2019 The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV, 121, M.G.Road, Chennai - 600 034. ... Appellant Versus M/s.M.M.Forgings Ltd., Guindy House, 95, Anna Salai, Chennani - 600 032. ... Respondent (PAN No.AAA CM 2164 L) Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Chennai, dated 28.03.2014 in I.TA.No.2311/Mds/2013. For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan & Mr.Rajesh Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar Page 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.109 of 2019 J U D G M E N T (Judgment was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the order dated 28.03.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai in I.T.A.No.2311/Mds/2013, relating to the assessment year 2010-11. 2. By order dated 28.02.2019, this court admitted the aforesaid tax case appeal on the following substantial questions of law: "(i) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that overseas payments made by the assessee on account of commission, warehousing and other charges, without deduction of tax at source, does not entail disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) read with Section 195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without taking cognizance of Explanation 4 to Section 9 (1)(i) and Explanation 2 to Section 195 (1), squarely apply to the facts of the present case? (ii) Whether the Tribunal was right in not appreciating the fact that the earlier decisions, relied upon by it, are no longer good law, after introduction of Explanation 4 to Section 9 (1)(i) and Explanation 2 to Section 195 (1) in the Statute Book by the Finance Act, 2012, with retrospective effect from 01.04.1962? " Page 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.109 of 2019 3. When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue brought to the notice of this court the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board Direct Taxes, wherein, it is stipulated that appeal shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). It is also submitted that the tax effect in this appeal is less than the threshold limit. 4. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeal, wherein, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed, is dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in an appropriate case. No costs. (R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q., J.) 26.08.2022 r n s

Internet : Yes.

Index : Yes / No. Page 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.109 of 2019 R. MAHADEVAN, J. and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. r n s To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-V, Chennai. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle IV (3), Chennai. T.C.A.No.109 of 2019 26.08.2022 Page 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis