Madras High Court
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S. Krishnan Sivagami Private Trust on 27 January, 2022
Author: R. Mahadevan
Bench: R. Mahadevan, Mohammed Shaffiq
Tax Case Appeal Nos.31 and 32 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.01.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
Tax Case Appeal Nos.31 and 32 of 2022
and
CMP.No.698 of 2022
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,
Non Corporate Circle – 22,
Tambaram,
Chennai 600 031. ...Appellant in both
Cases
-vs-
M/s. Krishnan Sivagami Private Trust,
KRISP IT PARK, 942 Vandalur Kelambakkam Road,
Kizhakottayur, Chennai 600 048.
PAN : AAATK 8074C ...Respondent in both
Cases
Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
against the common order dated 30.11.2017 passed by the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Chennai “C” Bench, in I.T.A.No.889/MDs/2017 and
888/Mds/2017.
For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan (in both cases)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/5
Tax Case Appeal Nos.31 and 32 of 2022
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.) These tax case appeals have been filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the order dated 30.11.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos.888/MDs/2017 and 889/Mds/2017, relating to the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10, by raising the following substantial questions of law:-
(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law holding that the referral charges received from the activity of the assessee of identifying the candidates for its foreign customer, amount to export of articles or things or computer software for being eligible for deduction under section 10A of the IT Act?
(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was right in law in holding that the assessee was engaged in export of computer software/IT Enabled https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/5 Tax Case Appeal Nos.31 and 32 of 2022 products or Services – Human Resources Services in the light of the STPI's letter stating that the assessee reported to have carried out the following activities: - Computer Software & ITES like
(a) System Software development, (b) Design and Implementation of MIS and design support system, (c) Project Feasibility studies and project monitoring system, (d) CAD/CAM/CIM/FEA and
(e) Back Office / Remote Data Entry. Whereas in fact, the assessee identified & short listed suitable candidates for its associate enterprise.
2. When the matters were 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 appeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). It is also submitted that the tax effect in these appeals is less than the threshold limit.
3. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeals, wherein, the tax effect is said to https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/5 Tax Case Appeal Nos.31 and 32 of 2022 be less than the monetary limit imposed, are dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in appropriate cases. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[R.M.D,J.] [M.S.Q,
J.]
27.01.2022
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
av
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench.
2. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle – 22, Tambaram, Chennai 600 031.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/5 Tax Case Appeal Nos.31 and 32 of 2022 R. MAHADEVAN, J.
AND MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
av Tax Case Appeal Nos.31 and 32 of 2022 and CMP.No.698 of 2022 27.01.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/5