THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. M/S. Q SOURCE GLOBAL CONSULT

TCA.Nos.630 & 631/2019 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.630 & 631 of 2019 & CMP.No.18325 of 2019 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai ...Appellant Vs M/s.Q Source Global Consulting Pvt.Ltd., Chennai-28. ...Respondent APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order dated 01.5.2018 made in ITA.Nos.1260 & 2062/Chny/2017 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench respectively for the assessment years 2013-04 and 2014-15. For Appellant: Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, SSC For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman 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 and Mr.A.S. 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.630 & 631/2019 Sriraman, learned counsel accepting notice for the respondent – assessee. 2. These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are directed against the common order dated 01.5.2018 made in ITA.Nos.1260 & 2062/Chny/2017 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench respectively for the assessment years 2013-04 and 2014-15. 3. The Revenue has filed these appeals by raising the following substantial questions of law : “i. Whether the Tribunal was right in deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer under Section 2(24)(x) read with Section 36(1)(va) holding that the employees' contribution paid towards provident fund/ESI belatedly was eligible for deduction while computing the business income especially when the Section prohibits such allowance to be granted ? and ii. Whether the deduction is to be allowed even in cases of belated payments of contribution made towards ESI/pension funds belatedly especially when Section 2(24)(x) read with Section 36(1)(va) refers to sums received as employees' contribution and not employer's contribution and would become income in the hands of the assessee as the same was credited to the relevant fund beyond due dates specified under those Act ?” 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.630 & 631/2019 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 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 raised 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. Consequently, the connected MP is also dismissed. No costs. 30.8.2019 Internet: Yes To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench. RS 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.630 & 631/2019 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J RS TCA.Nos.630 & 631 of 2019 and CMP.No.18325 of 2019 30.8.2019 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in