Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Bailey Hydropower (P) Ltd on 5 July, 2021
T.C.A.No.995 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 05.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
Tax Case Appeal No.995 of 2015
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant /Respondent
Vs.
M/s.Bailey Hydropower (P) Ltd.,
SIPCOT Industries Park,
Irungattukottai, Sriperumbadur - 692 105.
PAN: AABCB 1804F ...Respondent/Appellant
PRAYER: Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai "C" Bench, dated 02.01.2015 passed in
I.T.A.No.1265/Mds/2013 for the assessment year 2005-2006.
For Appellant : Mr. T.Ravikumar
Senior Standing Counsel
Page 1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.995 of 2015
For Respondent : Ms.Vardhini Karthik
for Ms.J. Sree Vidya
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M. DURAISWAMY, J.)
We have heard Mr. T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel
for the appellant/Revenue and Ms.Vardhini Karthik, learned counsel for
the respondent.
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 02.01.2015 made in I.T.A.No.1265/Mds/2013 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, "C" Bench (for brevity, the
Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2005-2006.
3. The appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions
of law:-
“Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Tribunal was right in allowing income from sale
or scraps while considering the deduction u/s.108 of the
Income Tax Act?
Page 2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.995 of 2015
2. Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad by holding
that the scrap sale was not part of the Export turnover
and allowing 100% deduction on the same while
computing deduction u/s.108?
3. Whether the finding of the Tribunal is proper
especially when the scrap is sold in the domestic market
which is a byproduct and not has nothing to do with the
export of the goods or merchandise?"
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.
Page 3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.995 of 2015
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 questions 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,
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.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
Index : Yes/No 05.07.2021
Internet : Yes
gv
Page 4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.995 of 2015
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R.HEMALATHA,J
gv
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai,"C" Bench
Tax Case Appeal No.995 of 2015
05.07.2021
Page 5/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
