PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S.BANNARI AMMAN SUGARS LTD

T.C.A.No.265 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 24.08.2022 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.No.265 of 2017 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, No.63, race Course Road, Coimbatore. ... Appellant Versus M/s.Bannari Amman Sugars Ltd., 1212, Trichy Road, Coimbatore - 641 018. ... Respondent (PAN:AAA CB 8933 G) Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “A” Bench, dated 06.06.2016 in I.TA.No.1009/Mds/2015. For Appellant : M/s.M.Swaminathan &

V. Pushpa Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan For M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Page 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.265 of 2017 J U D G M E N T (Judgment was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the order dated 06.06.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench, in I.T.A.No.1009/Mds/2015, relating to the assessment year 2008-09, by raising the following substantial questions of law:- "(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the proceeds realized by the assessee on sale of Certified Emission Reduction Credit, which the assessee had earned on the Clean Development Mechanism in its wind energy operations, is a capital receipt and not taxable? (ii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in holding that sale of Carbon Credits is to be considered as Capital Receipt and not liable for tax under any head of income under Income Tax Act, 1961? (iii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the ITAT placing reliance on the order of Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. My Home Power Ltd., by ignoring the judgment on the very same issue by the another coorrdinate bench of the Cochin ITAT in the case of M/s.Appollo Tyres Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2014 47 taxmann.com 416?" Page 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.265 of 2017 2. 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. 3. 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.) (M.S.Q., J.) 24.08.2022 r n s

Internet : Yes.

Index : Yes / No. Page 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.265 of 2017 R. MAHADEVAN, J. and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. r n s To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Coimbatore. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-I (2), Coimbatore. T.C.A.No.265 of 2017 24.08.2022 Page 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis