Commissioner Of Income Tax,Chennai v. Dharani Finance Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 27.08.2018 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case (Appeal) No.272 of 2007 Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai.... Appellant/Respondent -vs- Dharani Finance Ltd.,57, Sterling Road,Nungambakkam,Chennai. ... Respondent Tax Case (Appeal) filed under Section 260-A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income-tax AppellateTribunal Madras “A” Bench, Chennai dated 06.10.2006 in ITANo.451/Mds/2004 for the assessment year 1997-98, against theorder passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(A)III, Chennai-34, made in ITA.Tr.No.469/2001-02/A.III dated 06/11/2003 andagainst the order of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax,Special Range IV, Chennai-34 made in PAN/G1.NO.36 D/97-98 dated14/03/2000 for Assessment year 1997-98. For Appellant:Mrs.R.Hemalatha Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent :Mr.N.Devanathan ****** JUDGMENT[Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.] Heard Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel forthe appellant, and Mr.N.Devanathan, learned counsel for therespondent. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.This appeal has been admitted on the following substantialquestions of law:- “(i) Whether in the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal was right in holdingthat the assessee is entitled for thedepreciation on the plant and machinery that waspurchased by the assessee from Dharani Sugars andChemicals Ltd. and resold back to same party? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstancesof the case, Explanation 4A to Section 43(1)could be invoked to disallow the depreciation onsale and leased back assets?” 3.Before we proceed to consider the substantial questions oflaw raised in this appeal, we have to first take note of thefact that the tax effect in the present appeal relevant for theassessment year 1997-98 is less than the threshold limit. Inthe case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. N.Meenakshisundaram[Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.868 and 869 of 2008; Dated 23.04.2018],one of us (TSSJ) had an occasion to consider various circularsissued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) as regardsthe threshold limits fixed for filing the appeals by the Revenueor pursue the appeals, which are pending from 2008 onwards. 4.Further, it is relevant to note that by CircularNo.3/2018, dated 11.07.2018, monetary limit has further beenincreased and appeals be maintainable before the High Courts.It has been increased to Rs.50,00,000/-. Hence, viewed from anyangle, this appeal could not have been filed. 5.Thus, by applying the above Circular issued by the CBDT,this appeal ought not to have been filed by the Revenue andhence, for that reason, this tax case appeal is dismissed andthe substantial questions of law, framed for consideration, areleft open. No costs. //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar (abr) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. 2.The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Madras “A” Bench, Chennai. 3.The Joint Commissioner of Income-tax, Special Range IV, Chennai-34. Special Range IV, Chennai-34. +1cc to Mr.T.Ravi kumar, Advocate sr.no.58430 T.C.(A) No.272 of 2007 nr 11/09/2018