The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.airplaza Retal Holdings Pvt. Ltd

In the High Court of Judicature at MadrasDated : 28.08.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMandThe Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.69 of 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai. ...AppellantVs M/s.Airplaza Retal Holdings Pvt. Ltd.,4, Mookambika Complex, 5th Floor,Lady Desika Road, Mylapore,Chennai - 600 004.PAN: ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 01.05.2017 made in ITA.No.2227/MDS/2016 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench forthe assessment year 2011-12, against the order passed by theCommissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-I, Chennai dt 29/4/16 in newITA No.145/CIT(A)-1/2014-15 for the assessment year 2011-12against the order dt 28/3/2014 passed by the Deputy Commissionerof Income Tax, Company Circle I(1) Chennai for the Assessmentyear 2011-12.For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC and Ms.R.Hemalatha, SSC For Respondent: Mr.R.Sivaraman JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J.) We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel, and Ms.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counselappearing for the appellant/revenue and Mr.R.Sivaraman, learnedcounsel appearing for the respondent/assessee. 2.This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated01.05.2017 made in ITA.No.2227/MDS/2016 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'V' Bench for theassessment year 2011-12. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The appeal has been filed by raising the followingsubstantial questions of law : “1.Whether depreciation on goodwill is to beallowed especially when the assessee has createdgoodwill artificially by revaluing the assets muchafter taking over of the Company which isafterthought and therefore not allowable? 2.Whether the assets which were revalueddownward in the next assessment year was to createa difference which could be termed as goodwill? 3.Whether the treatment of revaluation ofassets does not represent goodwill as it is only acapital loss arising out of slum sale and thereforenot allowable expenditure?" 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.17/2019dated 08.8.2019 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 lessthan 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 //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar cse To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-1 Chennai. Chennai. 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle I(1), Chennai. Company Circle I(1), Chennai. +1cc to Mr.T.Ravikumar, Advocate SR.73649 TCA.No.69 of 2018 SS(CO)CB(06/11/2019)