COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S PRASAD AND COMPANY,

TCA.No.1198 of 2015 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 17.06.2020 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA Tax Case Appeal No.1198 of 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax, No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore. ...Appellant Vs M/s.Prasad and Company, No.24, Gandhi Nagar 3rd Street, Tirupur-641 603. PAN: AAI FP 9785 H ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 19.06.2015 made in I.T.A.No.1353/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2009-10. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usha Rani, Junior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.R.Sivaraman Judgment was delivered by

T.S.Sivagnanam,J.

We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.1198 of 2015 assisted by Ms.K.G.Usha Rani, learned Junior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant-Revenue and Mr.R.Sivaraman, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 19.06.2015 made in I.T.A.No.1353/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2009-10. 3. The appeal was admitted on 21.12.2015 on the following substantial questions of law : “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in setting aside the claim of deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act back to the assessing officer, when the assessing officer had considered the Construction Agreement entered by the assessee with the land owner which is purely a Works Contract and the same was confirmed by the CIT(Appeals)? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in claiming deduction as per explanation to Section 80IB(10) inserted by the Finance Act, 2009 with effect from 1.4.2001? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.1198 of 2015 circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in not appreciating that the construction work was outsourced to a sub-contractor and therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant submits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue on account of the low tax effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.8.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. By the said Circular, the monetary limit for filing or pursuing an appeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above tax case appeal is dismissed on account of the low tax effect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open. In the event the tax effect is above the threshold limit fixed in the said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. (T.S.S., J.) (P.S.N., J.) 17.06.2020 Internet: Yes 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.1198 of 2015 abr T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J. abr To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai. TCA.No.1198 of 2015 17.06.2020 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in