Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Hardy Exploration And on 8 February, 2022
T.C.A.No.19 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.02.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
T.C.A.No.19 of 2012
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant
Versus
M/s.Hardy Exploration and
Production (India) Inc.
Floor 5, West Minister Building,
108, Radakrishnan Salai,
Chennai – 600 004. ... Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “A” Bench,
dated 09.06.2011 in I.TA.No.2154/Mds/2010.
For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan,
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : M/s.Venkatanarayanan
for Mr.Subbaraya Aiyar
Page 1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.19 of 2012
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.)
This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue,
challenging the order dated 09.06.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Bench 'A', Chennai, in I.T.A.No.2154/Mds/2010, relating to the
assessment year 2002-03.
2.By order dated 13.03.2012, this court admitted the aforesaid tax case
appeal on the following substantial questions of law:
“(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding
that the Site Restoration Expenses was an ascertained liability,
when the production sharing contract has not outlined any
specific modalities for site restoration expenses?
(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the site
restoration expenditure is an allowable expenditure while
computing thee book profit under Section 115JB of the Income
Tax Act?”
Page 2/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.19 of 2012
3.When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel
for the appellant / Revenue brought to the notice of this court the Circular
No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board Direct Taxes,
wherein, it is stipulated that appeal shall not be filed/pursued by the
Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not
exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). It is also submitted that the tax
effect in this appeal is less than the threshold limit.
4.In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel
for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeal, wherein, the tax effect is said
to be less than the monetary limit imposed, is dismissed as withdrawn,
keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in an
appropriate case. No costs.
(R.M.D., J.) (J.S.N.P., J.)
08.02.2022
vm/kas
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
Page 3/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.19 of 2012
and
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.
vm
To
1. The Commissioner of Income Tax ,
Chennai.
2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai, “A” Bench.
3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Larger Taxpayer Unit, Chennai.
T.C.A.No.19 of 2012
08.02.2022
Page 4/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
