Tca/154/2016 Of The Commissioner On Income Tax v. M/S. Ennore Port Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ... Appellant in both TCAs M/s.Ennore Port Limited,23, Rajaji Salai Chennai – 600 001. Appeals preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras, "B" Bench, dated 29.11.2011 in ITA.Nos.1681 &1682/Mds/2010 for the Assessment Years 2002-2003 & 2003-2004against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)–III, Chennai – 34 dated 30/07/2010 made in ITA.Nos.715 and716/2008-2009/A-III from the Assessment year 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 respectively and against the Assessment passed by DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax Company Circle II(1) Chennai – 34dated 01/12/2008 made in PAN.No. from the Assessmentyear 2002-2003 and 2003-2004. COMMON JUDGMENT (Common Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mr. Karthik Ranganathan, learned SeniorStanding Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and N.V.Balaji,learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) are directedagainst the orders dated 29.11.2011 made in ITA.Nos.1681 &1682/Mds/2010 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Chennai, "B" Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for theAssessment Years 2002-2003 & 2003-2004. 3. The appeals were admitted on the following substantialquestions of law:- “Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding that thedepreciation on account of expenses incurred inconnection with setting up of break water in the port wasallowable even though the same was not formingpart of the block of assets in the schedule,which allows depreciation? And (ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding that thedepreciation on port creation charges is to betreated as plant and machinery and allowed theclaim of the assessee at 25% or 10% as applicableto buildings?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for theappellant submits that the above appeals are 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 these cases are less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax CaseAppeals are dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low TaxEffect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open.In the event the tax effect in these cases is above thethreshold limit fixed in the said Circular, liberty is granted https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to restore theappeals to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. Sd/-Assistant Registrar(L.A) //True copy// gv Sub Assistant Registrar To1. The Registrar, The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai,"B" Bench.2. The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-III, Chennai – 34.3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle – II(1), Chennai – 34. T.C.A.Nos.154 & 155 of 2016 KV(CO)RLP(30/07/2021)