Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Rajparis Civil Constructio

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 21.8.2019 Coram :

The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.504 of 2012 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai ...Appellant Vs.

M/s.Rajparis Civil Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Chennai-6.

...Respondent

APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 26.7.2012 made in ITA.No.1191/Mds/2011 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench for the assessment year 2006-07 and against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -VI, Chennai -34, dated 10/03/2011 and made in ITA.No.90/10-11 and against the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle V(3), Chennai dated 11/12/2008 and made in PAN./G.I.No.AACR1734M/53213-R for the assessment year 2006-07. For Appellant :

Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC & Mrs.R.Hemalatha, SSC For Respondent :

Mr.Sathiyaseelan Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant - Revenue and Mr.Sathiyaseelan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent - assessee.

2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 26.7.2012 made in ITA.No. 1191/Mds/2011 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench for the assessment year 2006-07.

3. The appeal was admitted on 05.2.2013 on the following substantial questions of law :

"i. Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not always duty bound to consider a claim, which was never before him ? and ii. Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in not interfering with the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) though the assessee was only a contractor carrying out works contract and is not eligible for deduction under Section 80IB(10)?"

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 08.8.2019 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 of law framed 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 make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench.

2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-VI, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-34.

3.The Assistant Commissioner of Tax, Company Circle -V(3), Chennai.

+1 cc to M/s.T.Ravikumar,Advocate Sr.No. 71102 AKM/19.11.19/3P-5C / TCA.No.504 of 2012