THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. SHRI S.P.BALASUBRAHMANYAM

T.C.A.Nos.304 & 305 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal Nos.304 and 305 of 2017 and C.M.P.No.8698 of 2017 Commissioner of Income Tax, Media Circle, Chennai. .. Appellant in both Appeals -vs- Shri S.P.Balasubrahmanyam, No.16, Kamdar Nagar, Chennai-600 034. PAN: AADPB 4195 J .. Respondent in both Appeals Appeals under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the common order dated 05.08.2016, made in I.T.A.Nos.696/Mds/2016 and 1160/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2006-07. For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan, (In both Appeals) Senior Standing Counsel : assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.J.Balachandar (In both Appeals) ****** 1/5 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.304 & 305 of 2017 COMMON JUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) These appeals filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income- tax Act, 1961 are directed against the common order dated 05.08.2016, made in I.T.A.Nos.696/Mds/2016 and 1160/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2006-07. 2.The appeals have been filed raising the following substantial questions of law:- “(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act are applicable only to the amounts of expenditure which are payable as on 31st March of the relevant previous year and it cannot be invoked to disallow expenditure which had been actually paid during the previous year without deduction of tax at source? (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified and correct in deleting the addition made u/s 40(a)(ia) on account of short deduction of tax relying on the decision of CIT vs. S.K.Tekriwal (361 ITR 432) (Cal), ignoring the decision of Kerala High Court in the case of 2/5 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.304 & 305 of 2017 CIT vs. P.V.S.Memorial Hospital Ltd. (2016) (380 ITR 284) (ker)? (iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified and correct in remitting the issue of addition u/s 40(a)(ia) relying on the decision of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Special Bench at Vizag in the case of Merilyn Shipping & Transporters when such decision was stayed by Andhra Pradesh High Court? and (iv) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in remitting the issue of addition u/s 40(a)(ia) relying on the decision in Merilyn Shipping & Transporters and ignoring the decisions in CIT vs. Sikandarkhan N. Tunvar & Ors (Guj) (357 ITR 312), CIT vs. Crescent Export Syndicate (Cal) (216 Taxman 258), Palam Gas Service vs. CIT (HP) (370 ITR 740), P.M.S. Diesels vs CIT (P & H) (374 ITR 562) and Thomas George Muthoot vs. CIT (Ker) (63 taxmann.com 89)?” 3.Heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant – and Mr.J.Balachandar, learned counsel for the respondent. 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant submits that the above appeals are not pursued by the Revenue on account of the low tax 3/5 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.304 & 305 of 2017 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 appeals are 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 appeals to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (T.S.S., J.) (V.B.S., J.) 29.08.2019 Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking Order abr To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai. 4/5 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.304 & 305 of 2017 T.S.Sivagnanam, J. and V.Bhavani Subbaroyan, J. (abr) T.C.A.Nos.304 and 305 of 2017 29.08.2019 5/5 http://www.judis.nic.in