Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S. Consolidated Construction ... on 14 June, 2021
T.C.A.No.299 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE: 14.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA
T.C.A.No.299 of 2021
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai - 34. ... Appellant
v.
M/s. Consolidated Construction Consortium Ltd.,
No.3, second Link Street, Commissioner of Income Tax Colony,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
PAN : AAACC4214B ... Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras,
"A" Bench, dated 27.12.2016in ITA.No.830/Mds/2016 for the
Assessment Year 2011-2012.
Page 1/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.299 of 2021
For Appellant :Mr.T.Ravikumar
Senior Standing Counsel
Assisted by Mrs. R.Hemalatha
Junior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.M.Kaushik
for Mr.S.Sridhar
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M. DURAISWAMY, J.)
We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar learned Senior Standing Counsel
for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.Kaushik, learned counsel for the
respondent/assessee.
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 27.12.2016 made in I.TA.No.830/Mds/2016 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, "A" Bench (for brevity, the
Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2010-2011.
3. The appellant has raised the following substantial question of
Page 2/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.299 of 2021
law in the above appeal:-
"(i) Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in
holding that the disallowance made under Section
40A(2)(b) are not attracted especially when the facts
on record clearly point that the payments made were
excessive and are made to relative parties?
(ii) Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in
holding that the additional depreciation is allowable
to the Assessee's Company which is engaged in the
business of construction contract and is not engaged
in the process of manufacture or production?"
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.
5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax Case Appeal
Page 3/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.299 of 2021
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.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
Index : Yes/No 14.06.2021
Internet : Yes
Rj
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai,"A" Bench
Page 4/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.299 of 2021
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R.HEMALATHA,J
Rj
T.C.A.No.299 of 2021
14.06.2021
Page 5/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
