Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Neyveli Lignite Corporation ... on 17 April, 2021
Tax Case Appeal Nos.130 and 131 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
Tax Case Appeal Nos.130 and 131 of 2016
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant
in all appeals
Vs.
M/s.Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd.,
Neyveli – 607 801. ... Respondent
in all appeals
Tax Case Appeals in Nos.130 and 131 of 2016 filed under Section
260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Chennai "A" Bench, dated 26.06.2015, passed in
I.T.A.Nos.529/Mds/2006 and 222/Mds/2009 respectively.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar
Senior Standing Counsel
in all appeals
For Respondent : Mrs.G.Janane
for M/s.Lakshmi Kumaran
in all appeals
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 1/6
Tax Case Appeal Nos.130 and 131 of 2016
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
The above appeals filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), are directed against the
order, dated 26.06.2015, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai "A" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in
I.T.A.Nos.529/Mds/2006 and 222/Mds/2009 for the assessment years
2002-03 and 2000-01 respectively.
2.The above appeals have been admitted on 08.03.2016 on the
following Substantial Questions of Law:
Common questions of law in T.C.A.Nos.130 and 131 of 2016 :
1.Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was justified in relying on the
amendment to Section 80IA made by Finance Act, 1999,
while allowing 100% deduction, even though the assessee
had commenced its operation in the year 1994-95, when
the position of law was different?
2.Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad by applying
the amended provisions of law by extending the benefit
retrospectively, which goes against the principle of strict
interpretation of machinery provisions?”
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 2/6
Tax Case Appeal Nos.130 and 131 of 2016
T.C.A.No.131 of 2016 :
“3.Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the
rejuvenation of the BWEs and life extension programme of
thermal power station are allowable expenses as current
repairs, even though the said expenditure was incurred
after the life span of the plant and machinery, which does
not amount to preservation of an already existing
machinery?
4.Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the
expenditure incurred in rejuvenation of BWEs and LEPs
are allowable as revenue expenditure, especially when the
assessee had capitalized the same in the books of
account?”
3. We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing
Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mrs.G.Janane for M/s.Lakshmi
Kumaran, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee.
4. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide the Substantial
Questions of Law framed for consideration on account of certain
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 3/6
Tax Case Appeal Nos.130 and 131 of 2016
subsequent developments. The Government of India enacted the Direct
Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) to provide for
resolution of disputed tax and for matters connected therewith or
incidental thereto. The Act of the Parliament received the assent of the
President on 17th March 2020 and published in the Gazette of India on
17th March 2020.
5.Learned counsel for the respondent/assessee submitted that the
assessee had availed the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and that the
respondent/assessee had already been issued with Form–3 on
08.03.2021.
6.Since the respondent/assessee had been issued with Form-3,
nothing survives for adjudication in the above appeals. Recording the
submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent/assessee, the
above Tax Case Appeals stand disposed of. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
17.04.2021
mkn (2/2)
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 4/6
Tax Case Appeal Nos.130 and 131 of 2016
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai "A" Bench
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 5/6
Tax Case Appeal Nos.130 and 131 of 2016
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R. HEMALATHA, J.
mkn
T.C.A.Nos.130 and 131 of 2016
17.04.2021
(2/2)
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 6/6
