Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 10953 Mad
Judgement Date : 28 April, 2021
T.C.A.No.288 of 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE: 28.04.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA
T.C.A.No.288 of 2021
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,
Corporate Circle - 2(1),
Chennai - 34. ... Appellant
v.
M/s. Island Hotels Maharaj Ltd.,
[Successor-EIH Associated Hotels Ltd.,]
1/24, GST Road, Meenambakkam,
Chennai - 600 027
PAN : AAACI 81573M ... Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras,
"B" Bench, dated 31.10.2017 in ITA.No.2993/Mds/2016 for the
Assessment Year 2010-2011.
Page 1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.288 of 2021 1
For Appellant : Mr. Karthik Ranganathan,
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.N.V. Balaji
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M. DURAISWAMY, J.)
We have heard Mr. Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing
Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.N.V. Balaji, learned counsel
appearing for the respondent/assessee.
2. The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed against the order
dated 31.10.2017 made in ITA.No.2993/Mds/2016 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, "B" Bench (for brevity, the
Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2010-2011.
Page 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
3. The appellant has raised the following substantial question of
law in the above appeal:-
“ Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble ITAT is correct and in law in holding that unabsorbed depreciation relating to AY 1997-98 to 2001-02 can be carry forward beyond eight years?
4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the
appellant submits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue on
account 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 the said
Circular, the monetary limit for filing or pursuing an appeal before the
High Court has been increased to Rs.1 crore. It is further submitted that
the tax effect in this case is less than the threshold limit.
5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax Case Appeal
is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low Tax Effect. The
substantial question of law framed is left open. In the event the tax
effect in this case is above the threshold limit fixed in the said Circular,
Page 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to
restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
Index : Yes/No 28.04.2021
Internet : Yes
Rj
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai,"B" Bench
Page 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and R.HEMALATHA,J
Rj
T.C.A.No.288 of 2021
28.04.2021
Page 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!