THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. M/S RANE BRAKE LINING LTD

TCA.No.546 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 22.08.2022 CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.No. 546 of 2017 Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai

.. Appellant Versus M/s.Rane Brake Lining Ltd., 132, Cathedral Road, Chennai 600 086

.. Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras “D”

Bench,

Chennai

dated

29.04.2016

passed

in I.T.A.No.1144/Mds/2015 in respect of assessment year 2002-03. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar

Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.P.Chidambaram

1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TCA.No.546 of 2017 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the appellant / revenue, questioning the correctness of the order dated 29.04.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras “D” Bench, Chennai in I.T.A.No. 1144/Mds/2015 for the assessment year 2002-03. 2. On 28.11.2017, this tax case appeal is admitted by this Court on the following substantial questions of law; ' 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in dismissing the Departmental appeal on the ground of low tax effect especially when there was a Revenue audit objection, which was accepted by the Department and therefore, the present case would fall within the expectations provided under Clause 8(c) of Notification No.5/2014? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in not dealing the case on merit and had merely dismissed the appeal of the Revenue on the ground of low tax effect? And 3. Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad by not considering the fact that levy of surcharge, interest under Section 234D, exclusion of other income from the calculation of deduction under Section 80HHC and 80IB are mistakes apparent from records and 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TCA.No.546 of 2017 would come within the purview of Section 154 of the Income Tax Act?” 3. When the matter was 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 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 this appeal is less than the threshold limit. 4. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeal, wherein, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed, is dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in an appropriate case. No costs. [R.M.D,J.] [M.S.Q., J.] 22.08.2022 msr

Index : Yes / No R. MAHADEVAN, J. and 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TCA.No.546 of 2017 MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. msr To 1. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle – V(3), Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai-34. 3. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras “D” Bench, Chennai T.C.A.No. 546 of 2017 22.08.2022 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis