COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.SREEVATSA REAL ESTATE

TCA.Nos.213-216/2016 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 30.8.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal Nos.213 to 216 of 2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Coimbatore ...Appellant Vs M/s.Sreevatsa Real Estates Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore-43. ...Respondent APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order dated 29.5.2015 made in ITA.Nos.2250/Mds/2012, 2100/Mds/ 2014, 22/Mds/2013 and 2236/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench respectively for the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2009-10 and 2010-11. For Appellant: Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, SC COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by

T.S.Sivagnanam,J)

We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue. 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.213-216/2016 2. These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are directed against the common order dated 29.5.2015 made in ITA.Nos.2250/Mds/2012, 2100/Mds/2014, 22/Mds/2013 and 2236/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench respectively for the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2009-10 and 2010-11. 3. The appeals were admitted on 20.4.2016 on the following substantial questions of law : “TCA.Nos.213 & 214 of 2016 : i. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 80IB on pro-rata basis in respect of composite project wherein some of the units had built up area exceeding 1,500 sq.ft., which is not provided under Section 80IB(10)(c) of the Income Tax Act? and ii. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in overlooking the fact that the project also consists of 20 villas that do not conform to the provisions of Section 80IB(10)(c) and as such, the entire project is not eligible for deduction under Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act ? TCA.No.215 of 2016 : Whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee is eligible to claim the value of closing stock of the Thiruvanmiyur land at market price when the assessee valued the closing 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.213-216/2016 stock of all other lands at cost price ? And TCA.No.216 of 2016 : Whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in setting aside the issue of claim of deduction of proportionate common expenditure to the Assessing Officer, when the same was originally considered by the Assessing Officer and also distinguished the judgment relied by the assessee while denying the claim ?” 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 08.8.2019 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 the respective cases is less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above tax case appeals are dismissed on account of the low tax effect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open. In the event the tax effect in the respective 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 appeals to be heard and decided on merits. (T.S.S.J.) (V.B.S.J.)

30.8.2019 RS 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.213-216/2016 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J RS Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes (or) No Internet: Yes (or) No To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench. TCA.Nos.213 to 216 of 2016 30.8.2019 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in