Madras High Court
The Principal Commissioner Of vs M/S.Faber Sindoori Management on 19 January, 2021
TCA.No.40 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.40 of 2021
The Principal Commissioner of
Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(1),
Chennai-34 ...Appellant
Vs
M/s.Faber Sindoori Management
Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai-6 ...Respondent
APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against
the order dated 04.2.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai made in I.T.A.No.1440/Chny/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.40 of 2021
the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) challenging the order
dated 04.2.2019 made in I.T.A.No.1440/Chny/2018 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench ('the Tribunal' for
brevity) for the assessment year 2011-12.
2. The Revenue has filed this appeal by raising the following
substantial questions of law:
“i. Whether, on the facts and
circumstances of the case and in law, the
Tribunal was correct and justified in holding
that employees' contribution of PF/ESI which
were deposited beyond the due dates specified
under the relevant PF/ESI Laws but before the
due date of filing of income tax return as
specified in Section 43B of the Act, cannot be
treated as the deemed income of the assessee
within the meaning of Section 36(1)(va) read
with Section 2(24)(x) of the Act? And
ii. Whether, on the facts and
circumstances of the case and in law, the
Tribunal was correct in applying the decision of
M/s.Industrial Security & Intelligence India
Private Limited without considering circular No.
22/2015 dated 17.12.2015 which clearly states
that only the remittance of employer's
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.40 of 2021
contribution of PF/ESI by the assessee as an
employer on or before the due date of filing of
return of income under Section 139(1) of the
Act would be allowable as per the provisions
under Section 43B of the Act, further it
clarified that it is not applicable to cases which
are governed by Section 36(1)(va) of the Act?”
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
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 questions
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.40 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J
AND
R.N.MANJULA,J
RS
of law raised 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 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, 'A' Bench, Chennai.
TCA.No.40 of 2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
