PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF IN vs. M/S FLORIND SHOES P LTD,

TCA.No.353 of 2020 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 01.10.2020 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.353 of 2020 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle II(1), Chennai. ...Appellant Vs M/s.Florind Shoes Pvt. Ltd., Chennai-6. ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 12.7.2017 made in ITA.No.55/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment year 2008-09. For Appellant: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, SSC For Respondent: Mr.A.S.Sriraman Judgment was delivered by

T.S.Sivagnanam,J

We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel accepting notice for the respondent – assessee. 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.353 of 2020 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 dated 12.7.2017 made in ITA.No.55/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2008-09. 3. The Revenue has filed this appeal by raising the following substantial questions of law : “i. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct in deleting the addition made under Section 14A of the Act by relying on the view that the assessee has not earned any exempt income and not redeemed mutual fund units, when there is no such exception given under Section 14A of the Act as well as in Rule 8D ? and ii. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct in not appreciating circular No.5/2014 of the CBDT wherein it has clarified that disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D has to be made even if the tax payer in a particular year has not earned any exempt income ?” 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 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.353 of 2020 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 raised 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. No costs. 01.10.2020 To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench. RS 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.353 of 2020 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J RS TCA.No.353 of 2020 01.10.2020 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in