The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Chennai v. Tamilnadu Maritime Board

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.215 of 2017 The Commissioner of Income-tax,Chennai... Appellant -vs- Tamilnadu Maritime Board,No.171, South Kesavaperumalpuram,Off Greenways Road, Raja Annamalaipuram,Chennai-600 028. PAN: .. Respondent Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961,againsttheorderdated23.09.2016,madeinI.T.A.No.1831/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2008-09,against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennaidated 11.03.2016 and made in ITA.NO.441/CIT(A)-1/2014-15 andagainst the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Business Circle-II, Chennai, dated 24.10.2014 for the assessmentyear 2008-09. For Appellant:Mr.T.Ravikumar Senior Standing Counsel & Mrs.R.Hemalatha Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent :Ms.Sri Lakshmi Valli For Mr.G.BaskarJUDGMENT(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome-tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 1/3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 23.09.2016, made in I.T.A.No.1831/Mds/2016 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai for theassessment year 2008-09. 2.The appeal has been admitted on 11.04.2017, on thefollowing substantial questions of law:- “(i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding that thecontribution made towards superannuation fund wasto be treated as business expenditure and allowedunder Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, eventhough it was an unapproved fund during the yearwhich according to the appellant was hit bySection 36(1)(iv) read with Section 40A(9)? (ii) Whether the reasoning and finding of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal is proper especiallywhen as per Section 36(1)(iv), the employer'scontribution towards recognized provident fund orapproved superannuation is to be allowed as adeduction subject to the conditions prescribedthereunder? (iii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in upholding theorder of CIT(A) who according to the Revenuefailed to disallow the alleged excess claim ofdepreciation which corresponds to the fixedassets, the cost of which is borne by the StateGovernment through capital grants and is contraryto the Explanation 10 of Section 43(1)? and (iv) Whether the reasoning and the finding ofthe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is properespecially when CIT(A) did not even deal with theenhancement of assessment on a reference made bythe Assessing Officer?” 3.Heard Mr.T.Ravikumar and Ms.R.Hemalatha, learned SeniorStanding Counsel for the appellant – and Ms.Sree Lakshmi Valli,learned counsel for the respondent. 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.17/2019,dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. By 2/3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the 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(CCC) //True Copy// abrTo Sub Assistant Registrar 2/3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the 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(CCC) //True Copy// abrTo Sub Assistant Registrar 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax,121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Chennai-600 006. 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Business Circle-II,Chennai. +1cc to Mr.G.Baskar, Advocate sr.75077 +1cc to Mr.T.Ravikumar, Advocate sr.74351 T.C.A.No.215 of 2017 mp(co)nr 12/12/2019 3/3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/