THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. BEACH MINERALS CO.PVT.LTD.,

TCA.No.727 of 2018 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 28.08.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.727 of 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ...Appellant Vs M/s.Beach Minerals Co. Pvt. Ltd., No.32/2, BMC House, Halls Road, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008. PAN: AABCB3450D ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 07.02.2018 made in ITA.No.1737/MDS/2017 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench for the assessment year 2013-14. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC and Ms.R.Hemalatha, SSC For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman for Mr.S.Sridhar JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J.) We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel, and Ms.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.727 of 2018 appellant/revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel for Mr.S.Sridhar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee. 2.This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 07.02.2018 made in ITA.No.1737/MDS/2017 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench for the assessment year 2013-14. 3.The appeal was admitted on 15.11.2018 on the following substantial questions of law : “i.Whether the disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D is to be made only if the assessee earns exempt income during the relevant previous year as held by the Tribunal, which is contrary to the provision of the said Section ? And ii.Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the employees contribution to provident fund and ESI was allowable as business expenditure under Section 43B even though the said contribution was not paid within the due dates as specified in the respective Acts and is contrary to the provisions of Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act? ” 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant submits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue on account of the low tax 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.727 of 2018 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 this case is less than the threshold limit. 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 make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. (T.S.S.J.) (V.B.S.J.) 28.08.2019 cse Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes (or) No To 1.M/s.Beach Minerals Co. Pvt. Ltd., No.32/2, BMC House, Halls Road, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008. 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench. 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.727 of 2018 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J. AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J. cse TCA.No.727 of 2018 28.08.2019 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in