COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KASIM TEXTILES MILLS P L

PDF · subscribers
TCA/663/2017HC Madras29 August 2019Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice T. S. SIVAGNANAM4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue on the ground of low tax effect, as per the submissions made by the Revenue's counsel and in light of CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. The Court noted that the tax effect was below the threshold limit for pursuing appeals before the High Court. Consequently, the substantial questions of law framed at the time of admission were left open. The Revenue was granted liberty to seek restoration of the appeal if the tax effect was found to be above the threshold limit in the future. No costs were imposed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle – (1), Madurai, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 30.03.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('B' Bench, Chennai). The appeal pertained to Assessment Year 2012-13 and challenged the Tribunal's decision regarding depreciation on certain assets claimed by the assessee, M/s. Kasim Textiles Mills Private Limited. The High Court admitted the appeal on substantial questions of law on 13.12.2017. The amount in dispute is not explicitly stated but is referred to as having a low tax effect.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that 80% of depreciation on land cost, rent charges, civil works, electrical fittings, and transformers is applicable to a windmill? (Question of law) 2. Whether the findings of the Tribunal are perverse and erred in not appreciating that the Assessing Officer had allowed depreciation on civil works, electrical fittings, etc., at the rate prescribed in Appendix 1 to the Income Tax Rules only? (Question of mixed law and fact) Assessee's Arguments: Not recorded. Revenue's Arguments: The Revenue submitted that the appeal was not being pursued due to low tax effect, citing CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 which increased the monetary limit for appeals to the High Court to Rs. 1 Crore. The tax effect in this case was stated to be below this threshold.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

T.C.A.No.663 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.663 of 2017 Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle – (1), Madurai. .. Appellant -vs- M/s.Kasim Textiles Mills Private Limited, 214, East Veli Street, Madurai-625 001. PAN: AAACK8107D .. Respondent Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 30.03.2017, made in I.T.A.No.2125/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2012-13. For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan, Senior Standing Counsel : assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.G.Baskar ****** 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.663 of 2017 JUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 30.03.2017, made in I.T.A.No.2125/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2012-13. 2.The appeal was admitted on 13.12.2017, on the following substantial questions of law:- “(i) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that 80% of depreciation on land cost, rent charges, civil works, electrical fittings and transformers are applicable to windmill? and (ii) Whether the findings of the Tribunal are perverse and erred in not appreciating the fact that the Assessing Officer has allowed depreciation on civil works, electrical fittings, etc., at the rate prescribed in Appendix 1 to the Income Tax Rules only?” 3.Heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant – and Mr.G.Baskar, learned counsel for the respondent. 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.663 of 2017 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 on account of the low tax effect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open. In the event the tax effect 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. (T.S.S., J.) (V.B.S., J.) 29.08.2019 Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking Order abr 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.663 of 2017 T.S.Sivagnanam, J. and V.Bhavani Subbaroyan, J. (abr) To 1.M/s.Kasim Textiles Mills Private Limited, 214, East Veli Street, Madurai-625 001. 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai. T.C.A.No.663 of 2017 29.08.2019 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →