Madras High Court
M/S.Sri Balasubramania Mills Ltd vs The Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 28 July, 2021
Tax Case Appeal No.200 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
Tax Case Appeal No.200 of 2013
M/s.Sri Balasubramania Mills Ltd.,
483, Kamaraj Road,
Uppilipalayam,
Coimbatore. ... Appellant
Vs.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Circle – I (1),
Race Course Road,
Coimbatore. ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras
"D" Bench, dated 05.11.2012 passed in I.T.A.No.476/Mds/2012.
For Appellant : Mr.A.Satyaseelan
For Respondent : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar
Senior Standing Counsel
and Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani
Standing Counsel
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 1/7
Tax Case Appeal No.200 of 2013
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity), is directed against the order
dated 05.11.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras
"D" Bench, ('the Tribunal' for brevity) in I.T.A.No.476/Mds/2012 for the
assessment year 1994-95. The above appeal has been admitted on the
following substantial questions of law :
“1.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case the Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that the
claim of the assessee is not allowable as current repairs?
2.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D'
Bench, is right in denying the claim of the assessee in the
light of the excepted carved out by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Saravana Shipping Mills Pvt. Ltd case reported
in 293 ITR 201 and Sri Mangayarkarasi Mills Pvt. Ltd.,
case reported in 315 ITR 114.
3.Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is
right in law in disposing of the assessee's appeal without
proper opportunity to place and refer to the evidences
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 2/7
Tax Case Appeal No.200 of 2013
which were on record and even referred to by the lower
authorities during the assessment and appeal
proceedings?
4.Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is
right in law in holding that the block asset concept would
disentail the claim, arising out of replacements, under
current repairs?
5.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in
holding that the items of machinery replaced were to be
considered independently, they are not parts of any
machinery but a machinery by itself?
6.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal failed to note that
replacement of old machinery or part thereof with new
one would always and in every given case constitute the
bringing into existence of a new asset in the place of old
one and not repair of the old existing machine?”
2. We have heard Mr.A.Satyaseelan, learned counsel appearing for
the appellant/ assessee and Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior
Standing Counsel and Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani, learned Standing Counsel for
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 3/7
Tax Case Appeal No.200 of 2013
the respondent/Revenue.
3. It may not be necessary for this Court to decide the Substantial
Questions of Law framed for consideration on account of certain
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.
4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the appellant/
assessee that the assessee had already been issued with Form-3 on
19.03.2021 and the learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of
this Court to withdraw the appeal.
5. In the light of the fact that the assessee has already availed the
benefit under the Act, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the
appeal pending. At the same time, the interest of the assessee in the event
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 4/7
Tax Case Appeal No.200 of 2013
the order to be passed by the Department under the Act is not in favour
of the assessee, is to be safeguarded. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal
stands dismissed as withdrawn on the ground that the assessee has
already been issued with Form-3 and the Department shall process the
application at the earliest in accordance with the said Act and
communicate the decision to the assessee at the earliest. As observed, the
assessee is given liberty to restore the appeal in the event the ultimate
decision to be taken on the declaration filed by the assessee under Section
4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made,
the Registry shall entertain the prayer without insisting upon any
application to be filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the
appeal and on such request made by the assessee by filing a
Miscellaneous Petition for Restoration, the Registry shall place such
petition before the Division Bench for orders.
6. With this observation, these Tax Case Appeal stands dismissed
as withdrawn with the aforementioned liberty, and consequently, the
Substantial Questions of Law are left open. No costs.
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 5/7
Tax Case Appeal No.200 of 2013
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
mkn 28.07.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
To
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "D" Bench
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Circle – I (1),
Race Course Road,
Coimbatore.
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 6/7
Tax Case Appeal No.200 of 2013
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R. HEMALATHA, J.
mkn
Tax Case Appeal No.200 of 2013
28.07.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 7/7
