Madras High Court
Principal Commissioner Of Income ... vs M/S.Prakash Impex on 25 January, 2021
TCA.No.93 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.01.2021
CORAM :
The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
The Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA
Tax Case Appeal No.93 of 2021
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,
Non Corporate Circle 7(1),
No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,
Chennai - 600034. ...Appellant
Vs
M/s.Prakash Impex,
58E, (N/P), SIDCO Industrial Estate,
Ambattur, Chennai - 600098.
PAN: AAAFP5388G ...Respondent
APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the
order dated 31.08.2017 made in ITA.No.1288/Mds/2017 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year
2012-13.
For Appellant: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent: Mr.Vikram Vijayaraghavan
for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan
1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.93 of 2021
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J)
This appeal, filed by the Revenue, is directed against the order
dated 31.08.2017 made in ITA.No.1288/Mds/2017 on the file of the Income
Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai (for brevity, the Tribunal) for
the assessment year 2012-13.
2. The appellant-Revenue has raised the following substantial
question of law for consideration:
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in
deleting the disallowance of commission
amounting to Rs.82,17,946/- paid to non-resident
agent, by holding that the provisions of
Sec.40(a)(ia) r.w.s 195 are not applicable to the
facts of the present case?"
3. We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior
Standing Counsel for the Revenue and Mr.Vikram Vijayaraghavan, learned
counsel appearing for the respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.93 of 2021
4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing 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
08.08.2019 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 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
framed 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. No
costs.
(T.S.S.,J.) (R.N.M.,J.)
25.01.2021
Index: Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking Judgment/Non speaking Judgment
hvk
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.93 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J
AND
R.N.MANJULA,J
hvk
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
'B' Bench, Chennai.
2. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,
Non Corporate Circle 7(1),
No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,
Chennai - 600034.
TCA.No.93 of 2021
25.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
