Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 14436 Mad
Judgement Date : 12 August, 2022
T.C.A.No.381 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.08.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
T.C.A.No.381 of 2013
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant
Versus
M/s Shriram Chits Tamilnadu Private Ltd.,
Greams Dugar 4th Floor,
149 Greams Road,
Chennai - 600 006. ... Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
against the order dated 04.12.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1740/Mds/2012.
For Appellant : Mr.J.Narayanaswamy
Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.R.Sivaraman
Page 1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.381 of 2013
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.)
This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue,
challenging the order dated 04.12.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1740/Mds/2012, relating to the
assessment year 2009-10.
2.By order dated 26.07.2013, this court admitted the aforesaid tax case
appeal on the following substantial question of law:
“Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the payment of royalty is not towards acquisition of intangible asset and is revenue expenditure, following its earlier order in ITA.No.1512/Mds/2010, which has not attained finality?"
3.When the matter was 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 appeal shall not be filed/pursued by the
Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not
Page 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.381 of 2013
exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). It is also submitted that the tax
effect in this appeal is less than the threshold limit.
4.In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel
for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeal, wherein, the tax effect is said
to be less than the monetary limit imposed, is dismissed as withdrawn,
keeping open the substantial question of law for determination in an
appropriate case. No costs.
(R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q., J.)
12.08.2022
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
av
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai.
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income - tax, Company Circle-VI(2), Chennai - 34.
4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - V, Chennai.
Page 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.381 of 2013
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
av
T.C.A.No.381 of 2013
12.08.2022
Page 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!