We Have Heard Ms v. The Appeal Was Admitted On 10.08.2010 On The Followingsubstantial Questions Of Law

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATE: 25.01.2021 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI T.C.A.No.786 of 2010 Commissioner of Income Tax-1,Tiruchirapalli ... Appellant/Respondentv. M/s. R.K. Textiles,No.292, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Bharathi Nagar,Karur - 639 002. ... Respondent/Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras, “C” Bench, dated 29.01.2010 inITA.No.1701/Mds/2009 for the Assessment Year 2005-06 againstthe order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)Trichirappalli dated 24/08/2009 in ITA.No.119/2007/2008 andagainst the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income TaxCircle II, Trichy dated 16/11/2007 in PAN/GIR No.AAAFR 662011for the Assessment year 2005-2006. For Respondent : Mr. N. Quadir Hoseyn We have heard Ms. V. Pushpa, learned Standing Counselfor the appellant/Revenue and Mr. N.Quadir Hoseyn for therespondent/ Assessee. 2. The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainsttheorderdated29.01.2010madeinITA.No.1701/Mds/2009 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai, ''C'' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) forthe Assessment Year 2005-06.https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The appeal was admitted on 10.08.2010 on the followingsubstantial questions of law: “(i) Whether on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding thatthe face value of DEPB is chargeable to taxon accrual basis and that the profit on sale ofDEPB representing the excess of sale proceedsof DEPB over its face value is liable to beconsidered under section 29(iiid) at the timeof sale? (ii) Whether on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in not holdingthat the scheme of DEPB is not anautomatic benefit to an exporter in the form ofcash assistance; but arises only on makingapplication to the concerned authority pursuantto exports and is in the nature of 'benefit ofperquisite arising out of business' andtherefore is chargeable to tax under section28(iv)? (iii) Whether on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in directing theAssessing Officer to allow depreciation at 80%on the electrical fittings and installationrelating to the transformer which is separatefrom the Wind Mill and therefore, was entitledfor depreciation only at 15%? (iv) Whether on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right that theassessee was entitled to deduction undersection 80HHC(3) when the conditions under theproviso to section 80 HHC (3) have not beensatisfied cumulative? 4.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for theappellant submits that the above appeal is not pursued by theRevenue on account of the Low Tax Effect in terms of CircularNo.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board ofDirect Taxes. By the said Circular, the monetary limit forfiling or pursuing an appeal before the High Court has beenincreased to Rs.1 crore. It is further submitted that thetax effect in this case is less than the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above TaxCase Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Lowhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/Tax Effect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open. In the event the tax effect in this case is above thethreshold limit fixed in the said Circular, liberty is grantedto the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to restore theappeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above TaxCase Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Lowhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/Tax Effect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open. In the event the tax effect in this case is above thethreshold limit fixed in the said Circular, liberty is grantedto the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to restore theappeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II)//True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarRjTo1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “C” Bench2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Trichirappalli.3 The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle II, Trichy.+1cc to Mr.M. SWAMINATHAN, Advocate, S.R.No.3978+1cc to Mr.N. QUADIR HOSEYN, Advocate, S.R.No.3992AJS(CO)SM/12/02/2021T.C.A.No.786 of 2010