Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Hatson Agro Products Ltd on 8 March, 2021
T.C.A.No.1500 of 2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.03.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
T.C.A.No.1500 of 2007
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant
Vs.
Hatson Agro Products Ltd.,
5A, Vijayaragava Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. ... Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras,
“A” Bench, dated 20.07.2007 in I.TA.No.2830/Mds/2005, Assessment
Year 2002-03.
For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.M.Kaushik
for Mr.S.Sridhar
Page 1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.1500 of 2007
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing
Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.M.Kaushik for Mr.S.Sridhar,
learned counsel for the respondent/assessee.
2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed against the order
dated 20.07.2007 made in I.TA.No.2830/Mds/2005 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “A” Bench (for brevity, the
Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2002-03.
3.The appeal was admitted on 12.12.2007 on the following
substantial questions of law:
“1.Whether in the facts and circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the
deduction under Section 80IA should be allowed at
30% of the profit on the unit concerned before
setting off the loss of other units as against the
Page 2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.1500 of 2007
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
IPCA Laboratories reported in 266 ITR 521?
2.Whether in the facts and circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the
expenditure on account of glow sign boards
representing promotion and pre-operative expenses
is allowable as a deduction?”
4.The learned Senior 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 08.08.2019 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 as withdrawn on account of the Low Tax Effect. The
substantial questions of law framed are left open. In the event the tax
Page 3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.1500 of 2007
effect in this case 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 appeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [T.V.T.S., J.]
Index : Yes/No 08.03.2021
Internet : Yes
mkn
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “A” Bench
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai.
Page 4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.1500 of 2007
M.DURAISWAMY, J.
and
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
mkn
T.C.A.No.1500 of 2007
08.03.2021
Page 5/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
