The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Chennai v. M/S.chennai City Centre Holdings Pvt Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 23.07.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA T.C.A.Nos.336 and 337 of 2017 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai.... Appellantin all appeals Vs. M/s.Chennai City Centre Holdings Pvt Ltd.,No.10-11, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai,Mylapore,Chennai – 600 004.... Respondentin all appeals Tax Case Appeals in T.C.A.Nos.336 and 337 of 2017 preferredunder Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against theorder of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, “A” Bench,dated 23.09.2016 in I.T.A.Nos.1000/Mds/2016 and 1001/Mds/2016,respectively for the Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-12respectively. Appeal against the order dated: 28/01/2016 made in ITANO.216/2013-2014 (New ITA NO 163/CIT (A)-1/2013-2014) & ITA NO321/2014-2015 (New ITA No.189/CIT(A)-1/2014-15) on the file ofthe Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chennai for theassessment year 2010-2011 & 2011-2012 respectively. Against the Order dated:19.03.2013 Made in PAN/GIR NoAAACG3869Q on the file of the Additional Commissioner of IncomeTax Company Range-I Chennai for the assessment year 2010-2011,and Against the order dated:29.03.2014 made in PAN/GIR NoAAACG3869Q on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of Income TaxCompany Circle-1(3) Chennai for the assessment year 2011-2012. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravi Kumar Senior Standing Counsel in all appealsFor Respondent : Ms.Sri Niranjani Srinivasan for M/s.G.Baskar in all appeals C O M M O N J U D G M E N T (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Ms.Sri NiranjaniSrinivasan, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. 2.The above appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act), are directedagainsttheorderdated23.09.2016madeinI.T.A.Nos.1000/Mds/2016 and 1001/Mds/2016, on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, “A” Bench (for brevity,the Tribunal) for the Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-12respectively. 3.The above appeals were admitted on the followingsubstantial question of law:“Whether an assessee could avail 80% depreciationapplicable to plant and machinery for civil works madefor the purpose of setting up of a wind mill orwhether such civil works would qualify fordepreciation of 10% applicable in respect of buildingsand other civil constructions?” 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeals are not pursued by the Revenue onaccount of the Low Tax Effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019dated 08.08.2019 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 these cases isless 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 question of law framed is left open. Inthe event the tax effect in these cases is above the thresholdlimit fixed in the said Circular, liberty is granted to theRevenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the aboveappeals to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mkn https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, “A” Bench. Madras, “A” Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax,Appeal-I Chennai-34. Chennai-34. 3. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Company Range-1, Chennai. Company Range-1, Chennai. 4. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. Company Circle-1(3) Chennai. Company Circle-1(3) Chennai. +1cc to Mr.T.Ravikumar, Advocate, S.R.No.35170 +1cc to Mr.G.Baskar, Advocate, S.R.No.35426 RSV(CO)SB(10/08/2021) T.C.A.Nos.336 and 337 of 2017