THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. M/S. CHOLAMANDALAM MS

T.C.A.No.751 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 25.08.2022 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Tax Case Appeal No.751 of 2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai

.. Appellant Vs. M/s.Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd. “Dare House”, 2nd Floor No.2, NSC Bose Road Chennai 600 001 PAN : AABCC6633K .. Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 28.01.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1483/Mds/2015. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar

Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.751 of 2016 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, calling in question the correctness of the order dated 28.01.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1483/Mds/2015, relating to the assessment year 2003-04. 2. By order dated 26.10.2016, this Court admitted the aforesaid tax case appeal on the following substantial questions of law : “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in granting depreciation on the composite value of the flat which included the cost of the land also ? 2. Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad by directing the AO not to bifurcate the cost of the land between the land cost and the building cost which is contrary to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Hoogly Mills – 287 ITR 333 which has upheld such bifurcation? 3. Whether the order passed by the Tribunal is proper by directing the AO to allow depreciation on the land also especially when the depreciation cannot be allowed on the cost of the land?” 3. When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned Standing 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.751 of 2016 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 Standing 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.] Internet : Yes 25.08.2022 gya To 1.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle-I(3), Chennai 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-VII Chennai 3.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai R. MAHADEVAN, J. AND 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.751 of 2016 MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. gya Tax Case Appeal No.751 of 2016 25.08.2022

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis