Tca/1011/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Vedanayagam Hospitals Pvt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 26.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMANDTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN TAX CASE APPEAL NO.1011 OF 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax,Coimbatore... Appellant/Appellant-vs- M/s.Vedanayagam Hospitals Pvt. Ltd.,133, Bhasyakaralu Road, R.S.Puram,Coimbatore-641 002. .. Respondent/Respondent Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961,against the order dated 07.03.2014, on the file of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1933/Mds/2013 for the assessment year 2010-11. against the order ofthe Income Tax (Appeals)-I Coimbatore in Appeal No.146/12-13dated 06.08.2013 and against the order of the DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle 1(3), Coimbatore, inPAN.No.AAACV9940R, dated 31.01.2013 Assessment Year 2010-2011. For Appellant:Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar,Senior Standing Counsel:assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani,Junior Standing Counsel For Respondent :Ms.Sree Lakshmi Valli JUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal filed by the appellant/Revenue under Section 260Aof the Income-tax Act, 1961, is directed against the order dated07.03.2014, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal 'A'Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1933/Mds/2013 for the assessmentyear 2010-11. 2.The above appeal was admitted on the following substantialquestions of law, vide order dated 09.12.2014:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ “(i) Whether under the facts and circumstancesof the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal wasright in law in holding that the assessee isentitled to deduction under Section 80IA withoutsetting off the losses/unabsorbed depreciationpertaining to the windmill, which were set off inthe earlier year against other business income ofthe assessee? (ii) Whether under the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal wascorrect in holding that the initial assessmentyear in Section 80IA(5) would only mean the yearof claim of deduction under Section 80 IA and notthe year of commencement of eligible business? (iii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal was rightin holding that the assessee has the option tochoose the first/initial assessment year of claimfor deduction under Section 80 IA? (iv) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal was rightin holding that the assessee is eligible fordeduction under Section 36(1)(v) in respect ofpayments made by it to the LIC, though theassessee did not establish that the fund has beenapproved by the Commissioner of Income Tax? (v) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal was rightin holding that the assessee is eligible fordeduction under Section 36(1)(v) since the samewas allowed in the earlier assessment years,though it is well settled that the principles ofres judicata does not apply in tax proceedings?” 3.Heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counselassisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Junior Standing Counsel forthe appellant and Ms.Sree Lakshmi Valli, learned counsel for therespondent. 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 less than the threshold limit. 3.Heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counselassisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Junior Standing Counsel forthe appellant and Ms.Sree Lakshmi Valli, learned counsel for therespondent. 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 less than 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(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarabrTo1. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Company Circle-I(3), Coimbatore.2. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Coimbatore.3. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai.4. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Coimbatore.+1cc to Ms.Sree Lakshmi Valli, Advocate, S.R.No.73052+1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.72916T.C.A.No.1011 of 2014 PVS(CO)CS/31/10/2019