Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Goldquest International Pvt. Ltd on 27 August, 2019
Author: T.S.Sivagnanam
Bench: T.S.Sivagnanam, V.Bhavani Subbaroyan
TCA.No.841 of 2015
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras
Dated : 27.08.2019
Coram :
The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
Tax Case Appeal No.841 of 2015
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ...Appellant
Vs
M/s.Goldquest International Pvt. Ltd.,
Raintree Place, 9th Floor,
Mc.Nichols Road, Chetput,
Chennai - 600 031. ...Respondent
APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order
dated 18.12.2013 made in ITA.No.1445/MDS/2013 on the file of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment year 2007-08.
For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, SSC assisted by
Mr.S.Rajesh, SC
For Respondent : Ms.J.Sreevidhya
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J.) We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel, assisted by Mr.S.Rajesh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.841 of 2015 appellant/revenue and Ms.J.Sreevidhya, 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 18.12.2013 made in ITA.No.1445/MDS/2013 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment year 2007-08.
3.The appeal was admitted on 29.09.2015 on the following substantial questions of law :
“(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting the addition on account of personal travel expenses of Rs.2,69,382/- incurred by the Managing Director of the company on five dates, which were not explained by the assessee for its business purpose?
(ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in deleting the addition on account of sales promotion expenses, when the assessee failed to furnish any details and genuineness of the expenditure, as the entire sales were made to the sister concern only, which is functioning in the next floor of the same premises?"
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 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.841 of 2015 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.
(T.S.S.J.) (V.B.S.J.)
27.08.2019
cse
Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order
Index : Yes (or) No
To
1.M/s.Goldquest International Pvt. Ltd., Raintree Place, 9th Floor, Mc.Nichols Road, Chetput, Chennai - 600 031.
2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench.
3/4http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.841 of 2015 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J.
AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J.
cse TCA.No.841 of 2015 27.08.2019 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in