The Hon'ble Dr.justice Vineet Kothariandthe Hon'ble Mr.justice C.v.karthikeyan v. M/S.ucal Fuel Systems Ltd.,Unit 505 Delta Wing, Raheja Towers, 177 Anna Salai Chennai 600 002

DATED: 8.2.2019 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN Commissioner of Income TaxChennaiAppellant Vs. M/s.Ucal Fuel Systems Ltd.,Unit 505 Delta Wing, Raheja Towers, 177 Anna Salai Chennai 600 002. Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 27.2.2014 made inITA No.2438/Mds/2005 Preferred against the Order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) IIIm Chennai dated31.08.2005 made in ITA.No. 108/2004-2005/A-III filed against theorder of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company CircleIII (3) Chennai dated 24.03.2005 for the Assessment Year 2002-03. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent : Mr.A.S.Srinivasan for M/s.S.Sridhar J U D G M E N T(Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue callingin question the correctness of the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 27.2.2014made in ITA No.2438/Mds/2005, by raising the followingsubstantial questions of law: "(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in law in holding thatthe assessee is entitled to deduction under Section80IA of the Act in respect of notional profits onaccount of power generated from its own captive https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ power plant and utilized by itself? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in overlooking the factthat the electricity was not sold by the assesseeand therefore, the profit/gain derived by theeligible unit cannot be computed and the amountclaimed by the assessee as deduction under Section80IA is only a notional profit and not actual profitderived by the eligible unit?"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 questions of law for determination in an appropriatecase. Sd/-Assistant Registrar (CS-V)//True Copy//Sub Assistant Registrar ssk.To1. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals (III) Chennai 2.The Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle III, (3), Chennai. +1cc to Mr.Swaminathan, Standing Counsel, Advocate, S.R.No. 11270+1cc to Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate, S.R.No. 11277 RSI(CO)GN(20/03/2019) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/