Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Apollo Hospital Enterprises ... on 28 June, 2021
T.C.A.No.254 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.06.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
T.C.A.No.254 of 2014
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Apollo Hospital Enterprises Ltd.
“Ali Towers” IV Floor,
55, Greams Road,
Chennai – 600 006. ... Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras,
“D” Bench, dated 29.03.2012 in I.TA.No.1571/Mds/2010, Assessment
Year 1997-98.
For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar
Senior Standing Counsel
and Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani
Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.N.V.Balaji
Page 1/5
T.C.A.No.254 of 2014
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing
Counsel and Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani, learned Standing Counsel for the
appellant/Revenue and Mr.N.V.Balaji, 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 29.03.2012 made in I.TA.No.1571/Mds/2010 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “D” Bench (for brevity, the
Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 1997-98.
3.The appeal was admitted on 25.08.2014 on the following
substantial questions of law:
“1.Whether in and facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in
holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction of
lease equalisation charges in addition to the
Page 2/5
T.C.A.No.254 of 2014
depreciation already claimed by it?
2.Whether in and facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in
holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction of
lease equalisation charges even though it is not a
non banking finance company?”
4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel 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
is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low Tax Effect. The
substantial questions of law framed are left open. In the event the tax
effect in this case is above the threshold limit fixed in the said
Page 3/5
T.C.A.No.254 of 2014
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.]
28.06.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
mkn
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “D” Bench
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai.
Page 4/5
T.C.A.No.254 of 2014
M.DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R. HEMALATHA, J.
mkn
T.C.A.No.254 of 2014
28.06.2021
Page 5/5
