Commissioner Of Income Tax, Tiruppur v. M/S.arun Textiles P Ltd., 80 Perumal Koil Street, Tirupur

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI T.C.A.No.542 of 2013 Commissioner of Income Tax,Tiruppur. ... AppellantVs. M/s.Arun Textiles P Ltd.,80 Perumal Koil Street,Tirupur. ... Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras, “B” Bench, dated 11.08.2011 inI.TA.No.569/Mds/2011, Assessment Year 2007-08 against theorder of the Commissioner Income Tax(Appeals)II, Coimbatoremade in ITA No.513/2006-10 dated of order 11/01/2011 for theAssessment Year, against the order of Deputy Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Company Circle, Tiruppur, made in GIRNo.AABCA8982D dated 21/12/2009 for the Assessment Year 2007-08. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar Senior Standing Counsel and Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani Standing CounselFor Respondent : Mr.R.Sivaraman JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned SeniorStanding Counsel and Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani, learned StandingCounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.R.Sivaraman, learnedcounsel for the respondent/assessee. 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainsttheorderdated11.08.2011madeinI.TA.No.569/Mds/2011 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai, “B” Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) forthe Assessment Year 2007-08. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The appeal was admitted on 28.10.2013 on the followingsubstantial questions of law:“1.Whetherunderthefactsandcircumstances of the case, the Hon'ble IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal was right in holdingthat profits of the windmill for the purpose ofcomputing deduction under Section 80 IA is tobe determined on the basis of price of Rs.3.50per unit which the assessee otherwise wouldhave paid, if it had bought from open marketparticularly when the assessee could realizeonly Rs.2.70 per unit for the supply made tothe Tamil Nadu Electricity Board? 2.Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was correct in law inholding that the applicability of market rateas contemplated under Section 80 IA (8) is notto be adopted when the rates are regulated bythe authorities like Electricity Board?” 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue onaccount of the Low Tax Effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.By the said Circular, the monetary limit for filing orpursuing an appeal before the High Court has been increased toRs.1 crore. It is further submitted that the tax effect inthis case is less than the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above TaxCase Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the LowTax Effect. The substantial questions of law framed are leftopen. In the event the tax effect in this case is above thethreshold limit fixed in the said Circular, liberty isgranted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court torestore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. Nocosts. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mkn To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “B” Bench, Chennai.https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ “B” Bench, Chennai.https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Tiruppur, Coimbatore. Tiruppur, Coimbatore. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle, Tiruppur. Company Circle, Tiruppur. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Tiruppur. Tiruppur. +1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Advocate SR.No.21549T.C.A.No.542 of 2013 RLD(CO)GMY(03/05/2021)