THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. M/S RXMD PHARMACEUTICAL

T.C.A.Nos.528 and 530 of 2016 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.Nos.528 and 530 of 2016 and CMP.Nos.10553 of 2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ... Appellant in both TCAs Versus M/s. RXMD Pharmaceutical Physicians P Ltd., No.3, Bishop Wallace Avenue West, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. PAN: AAACR 3594H ... Respondent in both TCAs Appeals preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 30.12.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos.379 and 381/Mds/2015. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar

Standing Counsel in both TCAs For Respondent : Mr.P.J.Rishikesh in both TCAs Page 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.528 and 530 of 2016

COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) These tax case appeals have been filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the common order dated 30.12.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos.379 and 381/Mds/2015, relating to the assessment years 2009-10 and 2011-12, by raising the following substantial questions of law:- “(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act? (ii) Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad by holding that the business of the assessee in relation to medical consultancy services to Pharmaceutical Companies are also eligible for deduction especially when the CBDT Notification No. SO.890(E) dated 26.09.2000 has not notified pharmaceutical company as doing information technology product or services? 2. When the matters were 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 appeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Page 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.528 and 530 of 2016 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 these appeals is less than the threshold limit. 3. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeals, wherein, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed, are dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in appropriate cases. 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 Page 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.528 and 530 of 2016 R. MAHADEVAN, J. and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. av To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Corporate Circle - 5(2), Chennai. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-V, Chennai. T.C.A.Nos.528 and 530 of 2016 29.08.2022 Page 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis