Commissioner Of Income Tax,Chennai v. M/S.subuthi Finance Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23.03.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI Tax Case Appeal No.920 of 2009 Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai ... Appellant v. M/s.Subuthi Finance Limited,15, Kadhar Nawaz Khan Road,Chenna – 600 006. ... Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, “D” Bench, Chennai dated 31.03.2009 passed inITA.No.876/Mds/2008 for the Assessment Year 2002-03. Against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax AppealsV, Chennai-34, in ITA.No.138/2005-06 dated 12/11/2007 in theassessment year 2002-03. Against the order of the Assistant Commissioner of IncomeTax Company Circle VI(4), Chennai, dated 29.03.2005 PAN/GIRNo.AAFCS 4074A/5057 in the assessment year 2002-03.For Appellant : Mr.J. Narayanasamy Senior Standing Counsel We have heard Mr.J. Narayanasamy, learned SeniorStanding Counsel for the appellant and M. Kaushik, learnedcounsel for the respondent. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainst the order dated 31.03.2009 made in ITA.No.876/Mds/2008for the Assessment Year 2002-03 3. The appeal was admitted on the following SubstantialQuestions of Law: “ Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case the Tribunal was right in holding that theassessee is entitled for depreciation on the accountof 2 Wind Mills which was added to the fixed assetsvalued at Rs.1.8 crores when the Insurance Policy TNEBcertificate, sale deed of the land relating to thewindmills proved that the assessee was not the ownerof the wind mill?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for theappellant submits that the above appeal is not pursued by theRevenue on account of the Low Tax Effect in terms of CircularNo.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board ofDirect Taxes. By the said Circular, the monetary limit forfiling or pursuing an appeal before the High Court has beenincreased to Rs.1 crore. It is further submitted that the taxeffect in this case is less than the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax CaseAppeal is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low TaxEffect. The substantial question of law framed is left open.In the event the tax effect in this case is above the thresholdlimit fixed in the said Circular, liberty is granted to theRevenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal tobe heard and decided on merits. No costs. Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar Rj To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai “D” Bench. Chennai “D” Bench. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals V, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-34. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-34. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle VI (4), 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-34. Company Circle VI (4), 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-34. +1cc to Mr.Sridhar, Advocate, SR.No.18935. MG(CO)CSR: 19.04.2021 Tax Case Appeal No.920 of 2009