COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. OFFICE TIGER DATABASE S

T.C.A.No.796 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.10.2020 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN T.C.A.No.796 of 2019 Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai. .. Appellant Versus M/s.Office Tiger Database Systems India Private Limited, AD42, 4th Avenue, Shanthi Colony, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040 .. Respondent Prayer:- Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai dated 04.05.2009 made in I.T.A.No.1823/Mds/2008 relating to the Assessment Year 2004-05. For Appellant : M/s.R.Hemalatha Senior Standing counsel 1/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.796 of 2019 For Respondent : Ms.Vandana Vyas JUDGMENT [Order of the Court was made by

T.S.SIVAGNANAM

, J.]

This appeal by the Revenue filed under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directed against the order dated 04.05.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, 'B' Bench ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.1823/Mds/2008 for the Assessment Year 2004-05. The Revenue has filed this appeal, raising the following Substantial Question of Law: “1.Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in dismissing the appeal filed by the revenue on the ground that the tax effect is below the limit prescribed in the circular No.5/2008 dated issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, though the tax effect of the amount of business loss and unabsorbed depreciation which was not set off before arriving at the deduction under section 10 A is to the extent of Rs.4.62 crores?” 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.796 of 2019 2. We have heard M/s.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Ms.Vandana Vyas, learned counsel appearing for the respondent / assessee. 3. The Tribunal, by the impugned order, dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant/Revenue on the ground that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rupees Two Lakhs and the Central Board of Direct Taxes ['CBDT' for brevity] has prescribed the monetary limits and precluded the Department from filing any appeal, which falls within the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT. The Tribunal noted that the Department could not pointed out that the appeal filed by them falls within the four exceptions framed by the CBDT for ignoring the monetary limit before us. 4. It is contended by M/s.R.Hemalatha that the tax effect of the appeal is more than Rupees Four Crores and the Tribunal ought to have considered the fact that the dispute involved is on the stage of setting off of the brought forward business loss and unobserved depreciation to the extent 3/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.796 of 2019 of Rs.12,88,91,523/-. Therefore, it is submitted that the Revenue's appeal is not barred in terms of the monetary limit prescribed in Circular No.5 of 2008. 5. Ms.Vandana Vyas, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee submitted that the contentions raised before this Court was canvassed by the appellant/Revenue by filing a Miscellaneous Petition in M.P.No.44 of 2010 and the Tribunal after considering the ground raised, has rejected the said petition and as against which, the appellant/Revenue has filed T.C.A.No.676 of 2014 and the same is now pending before this Hon'ble Court. 6. In the light of the subsequent decision rendered by the Tribunal, it would be appropriate for the appellant/Revenue to canvass all grounds raised by them in this appeal. In T.C.A.No.676 of 2014, where the Tribunal has dealt with the issue as to whether the appeal filed by the appellant/Revenue is hit by the monetary limit. Therefore, we close this Tax Case Appeal as disposed of, leaving the Substantial Question of Law open 4/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.796 of 2019 and giving liberty to the appellant/Revenue to raise all contentions in T.C.A.No.676 of 2014, which are either to them on law as on facts as well as those contentions which are raised in this appeal. Equally, the respondent/assessee is also entitled to put forth its submissions. No costs.

(T.S.S.,J) (V.B.S.,J) 29.10.2020 Kak Index: Yes / No Internet: Yes / No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai. 5/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.796 of 2019 T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J. Kak T.C.A.No.796 of 2019 29.10.2020 6/6 http://www.judis.nic.in