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
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.