THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF I vs. M/S MEGH SAKARIYA INTERNATIO

TCA.No.12 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 05.01.2021 CORAM : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA Tax Case Appeal No.12 of 2021 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai - 34. ...Appellant Vs M/s.Megh Sakariya International P. Ltd., No.16, Kesava Iyer Street, Park Town, Chennai - 600 003. PAN: AAACS8168G ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 05.09.2018 made in ITA.No.59/CHNY/2018 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench for the assessment year 2014-15. For Appellant: Mr.R.Karthik Ranganathan Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent: Mr.A.S.Sriraman 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.12 of 2021 JUDGMENT (Delivered by

T.S.Sivagnanam,J

) We have heard Mr.R.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Appellant – Revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed against the order 05.09.2018 made in ITA.No.59/CHNY/2018 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2014-15. 3. The appellant has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: “1.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in holding that the loss on capital incurred by the assessee company during the A.Y. 2014-15 to the extent of Rs.2.02 crores is eligible for deduction 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.12 of 2021 u/s 36(1)(ii) of the I.T. Act and qualify to be a bad debt? 2.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is right and justified in holding that the decision of the Apex Court in the case of M/s.TRF Ltd., is applicable to the assessee's case when the facts of the assessee's case are entirely different and distinguishable from the facts of the said decision?" 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing 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 08.08.2019 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 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.12 of 2021 fixed in the said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to file a petition before this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. (T.S.S.,J.) (R.N.M.,J.) 05.01.2021 Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking Judgment/Non speaking Judgment hvk 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.12 of 2021 To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench. 2. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai - 34. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.12 of 2021 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND R.N.MANJULA,J hvk TCA.No.12 of 2021 05.01.2021 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/