Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs M/S.Sical Logistics Limited on 6 August, 2021
T.C.(A).Nos.134 & 135 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.08.2021
CORAM
The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
The Honourable Mr.Justice SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
T.C.(A).Nos.134 & 135 of 2013
Commissioner of Income-tax,
Chennai. .. Appellant in both Appeals
-vs-
M/s.Sical Logistics Limited,
73 – Armenian Street,
Chennai-600 001. .. Respondent in both Appeals
Appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the
order dated 08.05.2012 made in I.T.A.Nos.390 & 391(Mds)/2012 on the file
of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai for the assessment
years 2004-05 and 2006-07 respectively.
For Appellant : Mr.J.Narayanaswamy,
(In both Appeals) Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : No appearance
(In both Appeals)
******
Page 1 of 5
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.(A).Nos.134 & 135 of 2013
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.)
These appeals, by the appellant/Revenue, filed under Section 260A of
the Income Tax Act, 1961, are directed against the order dated 08.05.2012,
made in I.T.A.Nos.390 & 391(Mds)/2012 on the file of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai for the assessment years 2004-05 and
2006-07 respectively.
2.T.C.(A).No.134 of 2013 was admitted on 10.04.2013, on the
following substantial question of law:-
“Whether under the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in
upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals) for applying the value of the land as per the
valuation report submitted by the assessee and not the
value as per the records of the Sub Registrar, for the
purpose of arriving at the fair market value of the
property as on 1st April, 1981?”
Page 2 of 5
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.(A).Nos.134 & 135 of 2013
3.T.C.(A).No.135 of 2013 was admitted on 10.04.2013 on the
following substantial questions of law:-
1.Whether under the facts and circumstances of
the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct
in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income
Tax (Appeals) who confirmed the addition made by the
assessing officer under Section 14A, only to the extent of
2% of dividend earned by the assessee? and
2.Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was
correct in stating that the method of calculation of the
disallowance set forth in Rule 8D would be applicable
only for assessment year 2008-09 and subsequent
assessment years?”
4.Heard Mr.J.Narayanaswamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for
the appellant/Revenue.
5.Though notice has been served on the respondent/assessee and their
name is printed, none appears for them.
Page 3 of 5
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.(A).Nos.134 & 135 of 2013
6.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant/Revenue
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 08.08.2019
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
these cases is less than the threshold limit.
7.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 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.) (S.S.K., J.)
06.08.2021
abr
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai.
Page 4 of 5
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.(A).Nos.134 & 135 of 2013
T.S.Sivagnanam, J.
and
Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup, J.
(abr)
T.C.(A).Nos.134 & 135 of 2013
06.08.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
