THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. M/S. ATLAS METAL PROCESSORS

TCA.Nos.432 & 433/2016 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 30.8.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal Nos.432 & 433 of 2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ...Appellant Vs M/s.Atlas Metal Processors Pvt. Ltd., Chennai-119. ...Respondent APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order dated 09.10.2015 made in ITA.Nos.1502 and 1503/Mds/2015 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench respectively for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. For Appellant: Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, SSC Respondent: Not ready in notice COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by

T.S.Sivagnanam,J)

We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue. 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.432 & 433/2016 2. These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are directed against the common order dated 09.10.2015 made in ITA.Nos.1502 and 1503/Mds/2015 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench respectively for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. 3. The appeals was admitted on 12.7.2016 on the following substantial questions of law : “i. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in dismissing the departmental appeal without appreciating the fact that no new undertaking was set up by the assessee, which is contrary to the provisions of Section 10B ? ii. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing deduction under Section 10B of the Income Tax Act? and iii. Is not the finding of the Tribunal perverse especially when no new unit was formed by the assessee and the claim made was on account of transfer of assets from old DTA unit, on which, the assessee had already claimed 80IA deduction ?” 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 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 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.432 & 433/2016 pursuing an appeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that the tax effect in the respective cases 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 in the respective cases 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. (T.S.S.J.) (V.B.S.J.)

30.8.2019 Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes (or) No Internet: Yes (or) No To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench. RS 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.432 & 433/2016 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J RS TCA.Nos.432 & 433 of 2016 30.8.2019 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in