The Principal Commissioner Of vs M/S.Jray Mcdermott Engineering
2021 Latest Caselaw 1118 Mad

                                                                                     TCA.No.43 of 2021


                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                         DATED : 19.1.2021

                                                             CORAM

                                       THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

                                                               and

                                         THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA

                                                Tax Case Appeal No.43 of 2021


                     The Principal Commissioner of
                     Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(2),
                     Chennai-34                                                      ...Appellant
                                                       Vs

                     M/s.JRay McDermott Engineering
                     Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai-96                                  ...Respondent

APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against

the order dated 23.10.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate

Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai made in I.T.A.No.1371/Mds/2018

for the assessment year 2011-12.

For Appellant: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, SC assisted by Mr.S.Rajesh, JSC

Judgment was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J

This appeal has been filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.43 of 2021

the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) challenging the order

dated 23.10.2018 made in I.T.A.No.1371/Mds/2018 on the file of the

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench ('the Tribunal' for

brevity) for the assessment year 2011-12.

2. The Revenue has filed this appeal by raising the following

substantial question of law:

“Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the MAT credit should be set off against the tax payable for the present year and thereafter on the balance tax only, the surcharge and education cess had to be computed and levied?”

3. We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Standing

Counsel assisted by Mr.S.Rajesh, learned Junior Standing Counsel

appearing for the appellant/Revenue.

4. The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant submits that

the above appeal is 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

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.43 of 2021

this case is less than the threshold limit.

5. In the light of the said submissions, the above tax case appeal

is dismissed on account of the low tax effect. The substantial question

of law raised is 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 file a petition before this Court to restore the appeal to be

heard and decided on merits.

19.1.2021 To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai.

RS

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.43 of 2021

T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND R.N.MANJULA,J

RS

TCA.No.43 of 2021

19.1.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/