Tca/98/2009 Of Commisisoner Of Income Tax v. M/S Shri Mookambiga Spinning

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 20.11.2018 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR Tax Case Appeal Nos.98 and 99 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax-III,Coimbatore ... Appellant/Appellant in both the Appeals -vs-M/s.Shri Mookambiga Spinning Mills Ltd.,Pongalur, Coimbatore. ... Respondent/Respondent in both the Appeals Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate TribunalChennai 'B' Bench, dated 15.02.2005 in ITA Nos.1690/Mds/2002 and1653/Mds/1999, for the Assessment year 1995-96 and Appealagainst the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-II,Coimbatore, dated 02.08.2002 in I.T.Appeal No.5-C/2002-03 andagainst the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Special Range-II, Coimbatore dated 10.03.1998 in PAN/GIR.NO.CX-2027. For Appellant:Mr.T.R.Senthil KumarFor Respondent :Mr.R.Sivaraman COMMON JUDGMENT [Judgement of the Court was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.] These appeals by the Revenue are directed against theorder passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B'Bench, dated 15.02.2005 in ITA Nos.1690/Mds/2002 and1653/Mds/1999, for the Assessment year 1995-96, respectively. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.Heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Counsel for theappellant/Revenue and Mr.R.Sivaraman learned Counsel for theRespondent/assessee. 3.These Appeals have been admitted on 12.03.2009, on thefollowing Substantial Question of Law: "1.Whether in the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunalwas right in holding that expenditure onreplacement of old machinery by purchase andinstallation of machinery was allowable asrevenue expenditure?” 4.We have perused the order of Assessment as well as theOrder passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and we find thatthe tax effect in these appeals are lesser than the thresholdlimit mentioned in Circular No.3 of 2008, dated 11.07.2018,issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, which fixes themonetary limit as Rs.50,00,000/- for the Department to pursuethe matter. Furthermore, the Revenue has not been able to pointout any distinguishing features, by which the Circular No.3 of2018, dated 11.07.2018, cannot be applied. 5.Thus, for the above reasons, the Revenue cannot pursuethese Appeals in view of the low tax effect. Hence, the Appealsare dismissed and the Substantial Question of Law, framed forconsideration, is left open. No costs. The Revenue is atliberty to seek for restoration of appeals, if at a later pointof time, it is found that the tax effect is above the thresholdlimit. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras 'B' Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-III, Coimbatore.3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range-II, Coimbatore. +1 cc to Mr.R.Sivaraman, Advocate Sr.No.79622+1 cc to Mr.T.r.Senthilkumar, Advocate Sr.No.79384 KK(CO)CSL/08.01.2019 T.C.A.Nos.98 & 99 of 2009