THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. M/S.FICHTNER CONSULTING

PDF · subscribers
TCA/902/2015HC Madras27 August 2019Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice T. S. SIVAGNANAM5 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the substantial questions of law on merits. The Revenue submitted that the appeals were not being pursued due to low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limit for appeals to the High Court to Rs. 1 Crore. The Court noted that the tax effect in these cases was below the threshold limit. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed on the ground of low tax effect. The substantial questions of law were left open. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to seek restoration of the appeals if the tax effect was found to be above the threshold limit, to be heard and decided on merits. No costs were awarded.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai, filed these appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the common order dated 17.03.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai 'B' Bench. The appeals pertained to assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 and were filed by the Revenue against M/s. Fichtner Consulting Engineers India P. Ltd. The appeals were admitted on substantial questions of law concerning the computation of deduction under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act and the taxability of billing in excess of revenue. The Revenue later sought to withdraw these appeals due to low tax effect, citing CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 which increased the monetary limit for appeals to the High Court to Rs. 1 Crore.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide the following substantial questions of law: For TCA.Nos.902 and 903 of 2015 (Assessment Years 2009-10 and 2010-11): 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in holding that telecommunication and foreign travel expenditure should be excluded from the total turnover for the purpose of Section 10A deduction? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in holding that expenditure incurred in foreign currency should be excluded from both export turnover and total turnover when computing Section 10A deduction? 3. Whether the ITAT's finding of excluding items from export turnover was proper in light of Explanation (2)(vi) to Section 10A? For TCA.Nos.904 and 905 of 2015 (Assessment Year 2009-10): 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in holding that billing in excess of revenue is not taxable for the assessment year 2009-10? 2. Whether the ITAT's finding is proper, given the assessee follows the mercantile system of accountancy and has offered the billed value in the profit and loss account on an accrual basis? Assessee's contentions were not recorded. The Revenue's primary submission was that the appeals were not being pursued due to low tax effect, citing CBDT Circular No. 17/2019.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 10A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

TCA.Nos.902 to 905 of 2015 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 27.08.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal Nos.902 to 905 of 2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ...Appellant Vs M/s.Fichtner Consulting Engineers India P. Ltd., No.165, 9th Floor, Menon Eternity Street, Mary's Road, Alwarpet, Chennai - 600 016. ...Respondent APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order dated 17.03.2014 made in ITA.Nos.2281 and 2282/Mds/2013 and ITA.Nos.367 and 368/MDS/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11. For Appellant: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, SSC assisted by M.S.Rajesh, SC For Respondent: Mr.A.S.Sriraman for Mr.S.Sridhar 1/5 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.902 to 905 of 2015 COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J) We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Mr.S.Rajesh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel for Mr.S.Sridhar, learned counsel 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 17.03.2014 made in ITA.Nos.2281 and 2282/Mds/2013 and ITA.Nos.367 and 368/MDS/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11. 3.The appeals in TCA.Nos.902 and 903 of 2015 were admitted on 17.11.2015 on the following substantial questions of law : “1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the telecommunication and foreign travel expenditure is to be excluded from the total turnover of the assessee for the purpose of deduction claimed under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act? 2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding 2/5 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.902 to 905 of 2015 that the expenditure incurred in foreign currency is to be excluded both from export turnover and total turnover while computing deduction under Section 10A? 3) Whether the finding of the Tribunal is proper by excluding items from the export turnover in the light of Explanation (2)(vi) to Section 10A while dealing with Export turnover?" 4.The appeals in TCA.Nos.904 and 905 of 2015 were admitted on 17.11.2015 on the following substantial questions of law : “1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that billing in excess of revenue is not taxable for the assessment year 2009-10? 2) Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad especially when the system of accountancy followed its mercantile system and once the assessee has raised the bill, it has offered the billed value in the profit and loss account on accrual basis?" 5.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. 3/5 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.902 to 905 of 2015 6.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 framed 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. No costs. (T.S.S.J.) (V.B.S.J.) 27.08.2019 cse Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes (or) No To 1.M/s.Fichtner Consulting Engineers India P. Ltd., No.165, 9th Floor, Menon Eternity Street, Mary's Road, Alwarpet, Chennai - 600 016. 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench. 4/5 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.902 to 905 of 2015 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J. AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J. cse TCA.Nos.902 to 905 of 2015 27.08.2019 5/5 http://www.judis.nic.in

More judgments on Section 10A

All 2,147 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →