Case LawHigh Court › M/S.seethakathi Trust698, Anna Salai v....

M/S.seethakathi Trust698, Anna Salai v. Chennai

High Court 04 Feb 2025 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
M/S.seethakathi Trust698, Anna Salai v. Chennai
Date of order
04 Feb 2025
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In M/S.seethakathi Trust698, Anna Salai v. Chennai, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal.

Decision: In view of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant, the appeal is dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
TCA NO. 577 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 04-02-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. S. SUNDARANDTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN TCA NO. 577 of 2008 Director Of Income Tax (exemptions), Chennai M/s.Seethakathi Trust698, Anna Salai, Vs ..Appellant Chennai-600006 ..Respondent For Appellant(s): M/s.V.Pushpa, Sr Standing CounselFor Respondent(s):Mr.G.Baskar ForM/s.N.Muthukumar JUDGMENT (Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble S.S.Sundar J.) `This appeal is directed against the formal order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 15.03.2005 in ITA No. 742/Mds /02. In this appeal the appelalnt has raised the following substantial question of law to be answered; https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis “1.Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee trust was entitled to depreciation on the capital assets, the cost of which has been allowed as deduction as application of income for the earlier years even though there are no legal provisions enabling the allowance of such double deduction, without considering the decision of the Apex Court in 65 Taxman 420? 2. Learned senior standing counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the amount involved in the present appeal is below the monetary limit as per the circulars issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes in Circular No. 5/2024 and 09/2024 dated 15.03.2024 and 17.09.2024 respectively. 3. In view of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant, the appeal is dismissed. However, the substantital question of law is left open to be answered at an appropriate appeal. No costs. (S.S.SUNDAR J.) (C.SARAVANAN J.) 04-02-2025 Index : YesInternet : Yes/Noak https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis S.S.SUNDAR,J.) and C.SARAVANAN, J. ak TCA No. 577 of 2008 04-02-2025
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan