The Commissioner Of Income Taxchennai v. M/S.sical Logistics Ltd.,South Avenue House,73 Armenian Street,Chennai 600 001

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13.12.2018 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH Tax Case No.2023 of 2008 The Commissioner of Income TaxChennai. ...Appellant /Appellant Vs. M/s.SICAL Logistics Ltd.,South Avenue House,73 Armenian Street,Chennai 600 001. ...Respondent/Respondent Tax Case filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 27.5.2008 made in ITANo.2319/Mds/07 and against the order of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals)-V and made in ITA No.6124/2005-06 dated15.06.2007 for the Assessment year 1998-99 and against the orderof the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle V(1)chennai and made in PA No.AA50045 A(33789B/1998-99, dated29.03.2005 the assessment year 1998-99. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, Senior Standing Counsel For respondent : Mr.R.Venkataraman for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar PadmanabhanJ U D G M E N T (Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J) This Tax Case has been filed by the Revenue calling inquestion the correctness of the order passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 27.5.2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ made in ITA No.2319/Mds/07, by raising the following substantialquestion of law: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in holding that drydock/Special survey expenditure cannot be withdrawnin a rectification proceeding under Section 154 ofthe Act?"2. When the matter is taken up for admission, the learnedStanding Counsel brought to our notice the Circular instructionissued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide CircularNo.3/2018 dated 11.7.2018 wherein it is stipulated that appealsshall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the HighCourt in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.50 lakhs. 3. In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the appeal filedby the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed, keeping open thesubstantial question of law for determination in an appropriatecase. ssk Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals V Tribunal, Madras. 2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench 'C' , Chennai. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle V Chennai. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. VGII-(CO)KAK(15/02/2019) TC No.2023 of 2008