Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Chennai City Centre Holdings ... on 23 July, 2021
T.C.A.Nos.336 and 337 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
T.C.A.Nos.336 and 337 of 2017
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant
in all appeals
Vs.
M/s.Chennai City Centre Holdings Pvt Ltd.,
No.10-11, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004. ... Respondent
in all appeals
Tax Case Appeals in T.C.A.Nos.336 and 337 of 2017 preferred
under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of
the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, “A” Bench, dated
23.09.2016 in I.T.A.Nos.1000/Mds/2016 and 1001/Mds/2016,
respectively for the Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively.
Page 1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.Nos.336 and 337 of 2017
For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravi Kumar
Senior Standing Counsel
in all appeals
For Respondent : Ms.Sri Niranjani Srinivasan
for M/s.G.Baskar
in all appeals
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
We have heard Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, learned Senior Standing
Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Ms.Sri Niranjani Srinivasan,
learned counsel for the respondent/assessee.
2.The above appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of
the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act), are directed against the
order dated 23.09.2016 made in I.T.A.Nos.1000/Mds/2016 and
1001/Mds/2016, on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Madras, “A” Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Assessment Years
2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively.
Page 2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.Nos.336 and 337 of 2017
3.The above appeals were admitted on the following substantial
question of law:
“Whether an assessee could avail 80% depreciation
applicable to plant and machinery for civil works made for
the purpose of setting up of a wind mill or whether such
civil works would qualify for depreciation of 10%
applicable in respect of buildings and other civil
constructions?”
4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel 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 the tax effect in these
cases is less than the threshold limit.
5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax Case Appeals
are 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
Page 3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.Nos.336 and 337 of 2017
in these 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 above appeals to be heard and decided on merits. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
23.07.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
mkn
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Madras, “A” Bench.
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai.
Page 4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.Nos.336 and 337 of 2017
M.DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R. HEMALATHA, J.
mkn
T.C.A.Nos.336 and 337 of 2017
23.07.2021
Page 5/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
