Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S. Accel Frontline Ltd on 17 December, 2021
T.C.A.Nos. 545 to 547 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.12.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
T.C.A.Nos. 545 to 547 of 2021
and
C.M.P. Nos. 19818 and 19863 of 2021
T.C.A. No. 545 of 2021:-
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Chennai. .. Appellant
Vs.
M/s. Accel Frontline Ltd
(formerly known as M/s. Accel ICIM Frontline Ltd)
No.75, Nelson Manickam Road
Chennai - 600 029.
PAN AAA CA 5622 M .. Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench,
Chennai dated 27.11.2015 in ITA No.2782/Mds/2014 for the assessment
year 2009-10.
T.C.A. No. 546 of 2021:-
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Chennai. .. Appellant
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.Nos. 545 to 547 of 2021
Vs.
M/s. Accel Frontline Ltd
(formerly known as M/s. Accel ICIM Frontline Ltd)
No.75, Nelson Manickam Road
Chennai - 600 029.
PAN AAA CA 5622 M .. Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench,
Chennai dated 27.11.2015 in ITA No.2780/Mds/2014 for the assessment
year 2007-08.
T.C.A. No. 547 of 2021:-
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Chennai. .. Appellant
Vs.
M/s. Accel Frontline Ltd
(formerly known as M/s. Accel ICIM Frontline Ltd)
No.75, Nelson Manickam Road
Chennai - 600 029.
PAN AAA CA 5622 M .. Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench,
Chennai dated 27.11.2015 in ITA No.2781/Mds/2014 for the assessment
year 2008-09.
2/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.Nos. 545 to 547 of 2021
For Appellant : Mrs. R.Hemalatha (in all Tcs )
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr. N.V.Balaji (in all Tcs )
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.)
These tax case appeals have been filed by the appellant /Revenue
challenging the order dated 27.11.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A. Nos. 2780 to 2782/Mds/2014,
relating to the assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10, by raising the
following substantial questions of law:
T.C.A. No. 545 of 2021
“ Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the
provisions of Rule 8D being prospective in nature cannot
be applied for the assessment year 2007-08 even though
section 14-A was inserted with retrospective effect from
01.04.1961?
3/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.Nos. 545 to 547 of 2021
T.C.A. Nos. 546 and 547 of 2021
“1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the
provisions of Rule 8D being prospective in nature cannot
be applied for the assessment year 2007-08 even though
section 14-A was inserted with retrospective effect from
01.04.1961?
2.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was right in directing the AO to do
the apportionment of common expenses on the basis of
turnover of STPI Unit and non STPI unit which the AO
himself had reworked the apportionment of common
expenses considering 1/3rd audit fee and director's
remuneration towards STPI Unit?”
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
4/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.Nos. 545 to 547 of 2021
exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). It is also submitted that the
tax effect in these appeals are less than the threshold limit and there is no
audit objection.
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. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are closed.
[R.M.D., J.] [M.S.Q., J.]
17.12.2021
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non-Speaking Order
Maya
To
1. The Commissioner of Income Tax
Chennai.
2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench
Chennai
5/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.Nos. 545 to 547 of 2021
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
Maya
T.C.A.Nos. 545 to 547 of 2021
Dated : 17.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
