The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Coimbatore v. M/S.sri Ranganathar Valves (P)Ltd., Coimbatore-25

DATED : 15.6.2020 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA TAX CASE APPEAL NO.232 OF 2014 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Coimbatore ...Appellant Vs M/s.Sri Ranganathar Valves (P)Ltd., Coimbatore-25 ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 18.11.2013 made in ITA.No.1684/Mds/2013 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench forthe assessment year 2010-11 and against the order dated 31-05-2013 made in Appeal No.126/12-13 on the file of the Income Tax(Appeals) 1, Coimbatore for the Assessment year 2010-11 andagainst the Assessment Order dated 05-02-2013 made in PANAALCS5492C on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of Income TaxCompany Circle 1 (3), Coimbatore for the Assessment year 2010-2011 For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC & Ms.K.G.Usharani, SC For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel and Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel appearingfor the appellant – Revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counselappearing for the respondent. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainst the order dated 18.11.2013 made in ITA.No.1684/Mds/2013on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C'Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2010-11. 3. The appeal has been admitted on 21.7.2014 on the followingsubstantial questions of law : “i. Whether the Tribunal was right in lawin holding that the assessee is entitled todeduction under Section 80IA without settingoff the losses/ unabsorbed depreciationpertaining to the windmill, which were setoff in the earlier year against otherbusiness income of the assessee followingthe decision of this Court in 340 ITR 477when the same is pending appeal before theSupreme Court in SLP (Civil) 1136 of 2011 ? 2. Whether the Tribunal was correct inholding that the initial assessment year inSection 80IA(5) would only mean the year ofclaim of deduction under Section 80IA andnot the year of commencement of eligiblebusiness ? And 3. Whether the Tribunal was right inholding that the assessee has the option tochoose the first/initial assessment year ofclaim for deduction under Section 80IA?” 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 said https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ circular, 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 RS To1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench.2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals-1), Coimbatore.3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Company Circle-1(3), Coimbatore.TCA.No.232 of 2014RLD(CO)KKV/01/09/2020