PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S.TAG CORPORATION
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the Tax Case Appeals filed by the Revenue on the grounds of low tax effect, citing Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. The Court noted that the monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Court as per the circular is Rs.1 crore, and the tax effect in these cases was below this threshold. However, the Court explicitly stated that the substantial questions of law framed were left open. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to seek restoration of the appeals if the tax effect was found to be above the prescribed limit, for hearing and decision on merits. No costs were awarded, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 7) filed three appeals (T.C.A.Nos.543 to 545 of 2018) before the High Court of Judicature at Madras against the order dated 15.07.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai 'C' Bench. These appeals pertained to assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13. The ITAT had allowed appeals filed by the assessee (M/s.Tag Corporation) against the orders of the CIT(A)-10, Chennai, which were passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. The dispute revolved around testing charges paid by the assessee to a Canadian entity and the consequent requirement of tax deduction at source.
What were the issues?
1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the testing charges paid to a Canadian entity did not constitute 'fees for technical services' and thus there was no requirement to deduct tax at source under Section 195 of the Income Tax Act? 2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in not considering the provisions of Section 9(1)(vi)/(vii) as amended by the insertion of Explanation by the Finance Act, 2010 with retrospective effect from 01.06.1976, and the provisions of Section 195(2) of the Income Tax Act for the testing charges? Assessee's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee before the High Court. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue argued that the tax effect in these cases was less than Rs.1 crore and therefore, the appeals were covered by Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the CBDT, which prescribes a monetary limit of Rs.1 crore for filing appeals before the High Court. Consequently, the appeals should be dismissed.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 195,Section 143(3),Section 250(6),Section 9(1)(vi),Section 9(1)(vii),Section 195(2),Section 260A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
T.C.A.Nos.543 to 545 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 18.12.2019 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN T.C.A.Nos.543 to 545 of 2018 and C.M.P.Nos.11376 & 11377 of 2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 7, No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai 600 034. ... Appellant (in all the appeals) Vs M/s.Tag Corporation, 91, Thiruneermalai Road, Chrompet, Chennai 600 044. PAN: AAA FT 1842 P ... Respondent (in all the appeals) PRAYER : Appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “C” Bench, dated 15.07.2016 passed in ITA.Nos.2192 to 2194/Mds/2015. For Appellant :Mr.Karthik Ranganathan (in all the appeals) Senior standing counsel 1/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.543 to 545 of 2018 C O M M O N J U D G M E N T (Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.KIRUBAKARAN, J) These Tax Case Appeals have been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 15.07.2016 passed in ITA.Nos.2192 to 2194/Mds/2015 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13. 2.The impugned order was filed by the Assessee aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A)-10, Chennai, dated 14.09.2015 & 21.09.2015 in ITA Nos.38, 45 & 11/2013-14/2014-15/2015-16/CIT(A)-10, passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s.250(6) of the Income Tax Act, where the Tribunal accepted the plea of the Assessee and allowed the Appeals. 3.These Appeals are admitted on the following substantial questions of law : “(i)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the testing charges paid to a Canadian entity was not “fees for technical services” and there was no requirement to deduct tax at source under Section 195 of the Income Tax Act? (ii)Whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in not 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.543 to 545 of 2018 considering that the provisions of Section 9(1)(vi)/(vii) as amended by insertion of Explanation by the Finance Act, 2010 with retrospective effect from 01.06.1976 and the provisions of Section 195(2) of the Income Tax Act for the testing charges? " 4.Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the tax effect in these cases are less than Rs.1 crore and is covered by Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Director, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, Delhi. As per the said circular, the monetary limit to file an appeal before the High Court is fixed at Rs.1 crore. In these cases, tax effect is less than Rs.1 crore and therefore, these cases have to be dismissed. 5.This Court perused the circular dated 08.08.2019 and Paragraph No.2 of the said Circular, which prescribes monetary limit for filing appeal is usefully extracted as follows: 2.As a step towards further management of litigation, it has been decided by the Board that monetary limits for filing of appeals in income-tax cases be enhanced 3/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.543 to 545 of 2018 further through amendment in Para 3 of the Circular mentioned above and accordingly, the table for monetary limits specified in Para 3 of the Circular shall read as follows: S.No. Appeals / SLPs in Income- tax matters Monetary Limit (Rs.) 1. Before Appeallate Tribunal 50,00,000 2. Before High Court 1,00,00,000 3. Before Supreme Court 2,00,00,000 6.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and also in view of the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Director, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Delhi, these Tax Case Appeals are dismissed on account of tax effect. However, the substantial question of law framed is left open. In the event the tax effect is above the 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 Petitions are closed. (NKKJ) (PVJ) 18.12.2019 sai 4/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.543 to 545 of 2018 To 1.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 7, No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai 600 034. 2.Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai. 5/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.543 to 545 of 2018 N.KIRUBAKARAN, J. and P.VELMURUGAN
, J.
sai T.C.A.Nos.543 to 545 of 2018 Dated : 18.12.2019 6/6 http://www.judis.nic.in
More judgments on Section 195
- Subramanian Aravind, Tuticorin vs Ward 1, TuticorinITA 297/CHNY/2026[2018-2019]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2018-2019
- Gmp Technical Solutions Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, MumbaiITA 6155/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
- M/S. Sarjak Container Lines Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs DCIT, Circle 3(1)(1), MumbaiITA 1791/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Universal Tractor Holding Llc, Usa vs DCIT, International Taxation Circle…ITA 2216/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: Disposed15 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Buttercup Publishing Private Limited, Delhi vs ITO Int Tax. 1(1)(2), DelhiITITA 19/DEL/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed7 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026