COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.TRIO SHIPPING SERVICES P

TCA.No.566 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.01.2021 CORAM : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA Tax Case Appeal No.566 of 2019 Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 3, Chennai. ...Appellant Vs M/s.Trio Shipping Services Private Limited, No.34, Gopal Street, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017. PAN: AABCT2299N ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 22.03.2019 made in ITA.No.1779/Chny/2018 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2011-12. For Appellant: M/s.V.Pushpa Standing Counsel For Respondent: M/s.Harshni Jyothiraman 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.566 of 2019 JUDGMENT (Delivered by

T.S.Sivagnanam,J

) This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed against the order 22.03.2019 made in ITA.No.1779/Chny/2018 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. The appellant was admitted on 08.08.2019 on the following substantial questions of law for consideration: “i.Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting the addition made under Section 37(1) by holding that the commission payments were not doubted by the Lower Authorities, when the same was doubted by both the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? ii.Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting the 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.566 of 2019 commission payment made by the assessee to the tune of Rs.1,60,50,000/- under Section 37(1) when the assessee could not produce any evidence for the justification of the payment?” 3. We have heard M/s.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel for the Appellant – Revenue and M/s.Harshni Jyothiraman, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue on account of the low tax effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 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. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.566 of 2019 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND R.N.MANJULA,J cse 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 framed 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 file a petition before this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. (T.S.S.,J.) (R.N.M.,J.) 18.01.2021 Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking Judgment/Non speaking Judgment cse To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai. TCA.No.566 of 2019 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/