Tca/753/2017 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. S.s.f. Ltd., Formerly

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case (Appeal) No.753 of 2017 M/s.S.S.F.Limited (Formerly known asSouthern Sea Foods Ltd.), K-16, First Main RoadAnna Nagar East, Chennai – 600 012PAN AABCS 0556K...Respondent Prayer : Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961,against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C”Bench, Chennai in I.T.A.No.1303/Mds/2016 dated 29.07.2016. Against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-15 Chennai dated 15.02.2016 made in ITA.No.471/CIT (A)-15/13-14pertaining to assessment year 2010-2011 against the order undersection 143(3) of I.T.Act dated 18.03.2013 passed by the DCITCompany Circle – VI (I), Chennai in PAN.No. AA13CSO556K. For Appellant :Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Standing Counsel JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.) This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the orderdated 29.07.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Chennai 'C' Bench in I.T.A.No.1303/Mds/2016 for the assessmentyear 2010-11, raising the following substantial questions of lawfor consideration. “1. Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the tribunal wasright in holding that the unabsorbeddepreciation pertaining to the assessment year1999-2000 to 2001-02, could be set off against https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the income of the assessment year 2010-11 incontravention to Section 32(2)(iii)(b) as itstood prior to Finance Act, 2001? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case, the tribunal was right in holdingthat unabsorbed depreciation pertaining toassessment year 1999-2000 to 2001-02, could beset off beyond eight assessment years and allowset off against the income of the presentasessment year 2010-11?” 2. Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for theappellant Revenue, fairly submits that this appeal is not beingpursued by the Revenue on account of low tax effect. In thisregard, the learned counsel has placed before us the Circularissued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes viz., CircularNo.3/2018, F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ (Pt), Government ofIndia, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxesdated 11.07.2018, wherein there has been a revision of monetarylimits for filing of appeals by the Department before theTribunal / High Court and Special Leave Petitions / Appealsbefore the Honourable Supreme Court. In terms of the monetarylimit fixed in Circular No.3 of 2018, the Revenue would not beentitled to pursue the appeal, if already filed or file freshappeals for the tax which does not exceed the monetary limit ofRs.50 lakhs. 3. Thus, applying the said circular, the present appeal isdismissed on the ground of low tax effect. Needless to statethat the substantial questions of law raised for considerationare left open. No costs. Sd/-Assistant Registrar (Insp Cell)//True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar KST To 1. Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai Chennai 2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai “C' Bench. Chennai “C' Bench. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle VI (1), Chennai. Company Circle VI (1), Chennai. +1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No. 45753 T.C.(A) No.753 of 2017 RGN(CO)GN(01/08/2019)