Commissioner Of Income Tax,Corporate Circle – (1), Madurai v. M/S.kasim Textiles Mills Private Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.663 of 2017 Commissioner of Income Tax,Corporate Circle – (1), Madurai. .. Appellant/Appellant -vs- M/s.Kasim Textiles Mills Private Limited,214, East Veli Street,Madurai-625 001.PAN: .. RespondentAppeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961,againsttheorderdated30.03.2017,madeinI.T.A.No.2125/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2012-13,preferred agianst the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Madurai dated 21.04.16 made in ITA.NO.0037/2015-16Assessment year 2012-13 filed against the order of the IncomeTax Officer, Corporate Ward-4, Madurai dated 23.03.15 for theAssessment year 2012-13 made in PAN.NO.AAACK8107(D). For Appellant:Mr.M.Swaminathan,Senior Standing Counsel:assisted by Ms.V.PushpaStanding Counsel For Respondent :Mr.G.BaskarJUDGMENT(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome-tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated30.03.2017, made in I.T.A.No.2125/Mds/2016 on the file of the 1/3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for theassessment year 2012-13. 2.The appeal was admitted on 13.12.2017, on the followingsubstantial questions of law:-“(i) Whether the Tribunal was right in holdingthat 80% of depreciation on land cost, rentcharges, civil works, electrical fittings andtransformers are applicable to windmill? and(ii) Whether the findings of the Tribunal areperverse and erred in not appreciating the factthat the Assessing Officer has alloweddepreciation on civil works, electrical fittings,etc., at the rate prescribed in Appendix 1 to theIncome Tax Rules only?” 3.Heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counselassisted by Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel for theappellant – and Mr.G.Baskar, learned counsel for the respondent. 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.17/2019,dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. Bythe said Circular, the monetary limit for filing or pursuing anappeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore.It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is lessthan the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above tax caseappeal is dismissed on account of the low tax effect. Thesubstantial questions of law framed are left open. In the eventthe tax effect is above the threshold limit fixed in the saidcircular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention tothis Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided onmerits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO)//True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar abr To 1.The Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I,Madurai.Madurai. 3.The Income Tax Officer,Corporate Ward 4,Madurai. +1cc to M/s.G.Baskar, Advocate sr.75080+1cc to M/s.M.Swaminathan, Advocate sr.75048rsi(co)nr 13/11/2019 T.C.A.No.663 of 2017 3/3