THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. M/S.TURBO ENERGY LTD

T.C.A.No.166 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.08.2022 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.No.166 of 2015 and MP.No.1 of 2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ... Appellant

Versus M/s. Turbo Energy Ltd., 'Stoneacre' No.67, Chamiers Road, Chennai - 600 028. ... Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 17.12.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.165/Mds/2012.

For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr. Venkata Narayanan for Mr.Subbaraya Aiyar Page 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.166 of 2015 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the order dated 17.12.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.165/Mds/2012, relating to the assessment year 2006-07.

2.By order dated 20.01.2016, this court admitted the aforesaid tax case appeal on the following substantial questions of law: “(i) Whether on the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the CIT(A) in the treatment of loss on sale of mutual fund under the head capital gains instead of the head business income? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that disallowance of donation made to local temple is to be allowed especially when assessee was in the business of manufacture and trader of turbo charges and precision automotive coponents? Page 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.166 of 2015 (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to rebate under Section 88E especially when the assessee is only a investor and not a trader? (iv) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the disallowance of Rs.29.47 lakhs made under Section 14A is to be allowed?" 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, Page 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.166 of 2015 keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in an appropriate case. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q., J.) 29.08.2022

Internet : Yes

Index : Yes / No av To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- III , Chennai. Page 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.166 of 2015 R. MAHADEVAN, J. and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. av T.C.A.No.166 of 2015 29.08.2022 Page 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis