Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S. Areva T& D India Ltd on 4 February, 2021
T.C.A.Nos. 682 & 683 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE: 04.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
T.C.A.Nos. 682 & 683 of 2009
Commissioner of Income Tax -1,
Chennai. ... Appellant in both TCAs
v.
M/s. Areva T& D India Ltd.,
(formerly known as Alstom Ltd)
No.314/315, Anna Salai,
Chennai - 600 018. ... Respondent in both TCAs
T.C.A. No. 682/2009 : Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Madras, “A” Bench, dated 03.11.2008 in
ITA.No.290/Mds/2006 for the Assessment Year 2002-03.
T.C.A. No. 683/2009 : Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Madras, “A” Bench, dated 03.11.2008 in
Page 1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.Nos. 682 & 683 of 2009
ITA.No.2247/Mds/2005 for the Assessment Year 2002-03.
For Appellant : Ms. R.Hemalatha,
(in both TCA) Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr. M.P. Senthil Kumar
(in both TCA)
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
We have heard Ms. R.Hemalatha, , learned Standing Counsel for
the appellant/Revenue and Mr. M.P. Senthil Kumar, learned counsel for
the respondent.
2. These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) are directed against the order
dated 03.11.2008 made in ITA.No.290/Mds/2006 & ITA.No.2247/
Mds/2005 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai,
''A'' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2002-03.
3. The appeals were admitted on 10.08.2009 on the following
Page 2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.Nos. 682 & 683 of 2009
substantial question of law:
“(i) Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right
in holding that the property in Lucknow which was
exchanged for another property in respect of which
the assessee had forgone the tenancy rights, was
acquired for a valuable consideration and allowing
depreciation under section 32 ?
(ii) Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right
in holding that interest u/s 234D cannot be charged
in respect of the refund granted prior to the insertion
of the Section 234 D when the regular assessment
was completed only subsequent to the insertion of
Section 234D? and
(iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of
the case, no interest can be charged even for the
period subsequent to the introduction of section
234D merely on the ground that the refund was
granted prior to its introduction?”
4. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant
submits that the above appeals are 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
Page 3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.Nos. 682 & 683 of 2009
the tax effect in respective cases is less than the threshold limit.
5. In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax Case Appeals
are dismissed on account of the Low Tax Effect. The substantial
questions of law framed is left open. In the event the tax effect in the
respective cases is above the threshold limit fixed in the said Circular,
liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to
restore the appeals to be heard and decided on merits. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [T.V.T.S., J.]
04.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
Rj
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai, ''A'' Bench
Page 4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.Nos. 682 & 683 of 2009
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
Rj
T.C.A.Nos. 682 & 683 of 2009
04.02.2021
Page 5/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
