THE COMMSSIONER OF INCOME vs. M/S. DURR INDIA PVT LTD

T.C.A.Nos.896 and 897 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 30.08.2022 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.Nos.896 and 897 of 2017 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ... Appellant in both TCAs Versus M/s. Durr India Private Limited, Srinivasa Towers, II Floor, No.5, Centoph Road, Cheenai - 600 018. PAN:AAACD 3568 P ... Respondent in both TCAs Appeals preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 21.12.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "D" Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos.754/Mds/2014 and 972/Mds/2015. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar

Senior Standing Counsel in both TCAs For Respondent : Mr.Venkata Narayanan for M/s. Subbaraya Aiyar in both TCAs Page 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.896 and 897 of 2017

COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) These tax case appeals have been filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the order dated 21.12.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "D" Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos.754/Mds/2014 and 972/Mds/2015, relating to the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11, by raising the following substantial questions of law: “(i) Whether the Tribunal was right in directing that disparate transactions be bundled together to benchmark them under the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNNM)? (ii) Was it proper for the Tribunal in not considering the fact that only closely linked transaction can be benchmarked using integrated approach which is not the case on hand? (iii) Whether the Tribunal was right in disregarding the OCED guidelines which had been approved for usage in Indian Transfer Pricing provide for bench marking on a transaction by transaction basis? (iv) Whether the Tribunal was right in not taking cognizance of Para 7.6 of the OCED guideline which deals with intra group services and all transaction are to be separately viewed for arriving at ALP? " Page 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.896 and 897 of 2017 2. When the matters were 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 these appeals is less than the threshold limit. 3. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeals, wherein, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed, are dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in appropriate cases. No costs. (R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q., J.) 30.08.2022

Internet : Yes

Index : Yes / No Page 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.896 and 897 of 2017 R. MAHADEVAN, J. and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. av To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Company Circle - 1(4), Chennai. T.C.A.Nos.896 and 897 of 2017 30.08.2022 Page 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis