Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax - I vs M/S. Madras Spinners Limited on 17 December, 2021
Tax Case Appeal No.584 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.12.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
Tax Case Appeal No. 584 of 2021
Commissioner of Income Tax - I
Coimbatore .. Appellant
Versus
M/s. Madras Spinners Limited
Race Course Mansion
8/1-M, Race Course
Coimbatore – 641 018 .. Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
against the order dated 05.08.2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, “C” Bench, Chennai in I.T.A.No.1718/Mds/1996.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan,
Senior Standing Counsel
Mrs.Usha Rani, Junior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.Subburaja Aiyar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/4
Tax Case Appeal No.584 of 2021
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.)
This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue, calling in
question the correctness of the order dated '01.03.2018 passed by the Income
Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1718/Mds/1996,
relating to the assessment years 1992-93, by raising the following substantial
questions of law:-
“(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in setting aside
the order of the assessing officer disallowing the claim of foreign
exchange difference of Rs.13,44,043/- as revenue expenditure and
directing the assessing officer to decide the matter afresh on the
basis of the decision of the Kerala High Court on the Revenue's
appeal for the assessment year 1991-92 challenging the finding of
the Cochin Bench of the Tribunal holding that the original cost of
the imported machinery was allowable as revenue expenditure?
(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in
observing that irrespective of the finding regarding the nature of
the expenditure on the original cost of machinery, the expenditure
on account of exchange difference was to be treated as capital
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tax Case Appeal No.584 of 2021
expenditure in view of the decision of the jurisdictional High
Court on this issue?
2. When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for
the appellant / Revenue brought to the notice of this court the Circular
No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board Direct Taxes,
wherein, it is stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department
before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed
Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). It is also submitted that the tax effect in
this appeal is less than the threshold limit.
3. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for
the appellant / Revenue, the present appeal, wherein, the tax effect is said to be
less than the monetary limit imposed, is dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open
the substantial questions of law for determination in an appropriate cases. No
costs.
[R.M.D,J.] [M.S.Q, J.]
17.12.2021
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
dhk
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tax Case Appeal No.584 of 2021
AND
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
dhk
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Madras “C” Bench.
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax - I
Coimbatore
3. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
Special Range, Trichur
Tax Case Appeal No. 584 of 2021
17.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
