The Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore v. Sri Ranganathar Valves (P) Ltd - 2020-LL-0615-32

Citation	2020-LL-0615-32
Appellant Name	The Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore
Respondent Name	Sri Ranganathar Valves (P) Ltd.
Court	HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	15/06/2020
Assessment Year	2010-11
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	initial assessment year • unabsorbed depreciation • claim of deduction • eligible business • business income • monetary limit • low tax effect
Bot Summary:	1684/Mds/2013 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench for the assessment year 2010-11. The appeal has been admitted on 21.7.2014 on the following substantial questions of law : i. Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 80IA without setting off the losses/ unabsorbed depreciation pertaining to the windmill, which were set off in the earlier year against other business income of the assessee following the decision of this Court in 340 ITR 477 when the same is pending appeal before the Supreme Court in SLP 1136 of 2011 2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the initial assessment year in Section 80IA(5) would only mean the year of claim of deduction under Section 80IA and not the year of commencement of eligible business And 3. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee has the option to choose the first/initial assessment year of claim for deduction under Section 80IA 4. 232 of 2014 the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue on account of the low tax effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.8.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. In the light of the said submissions, the above tax case appeal is dismissed on account of the low tax effect. 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.

TCA.No.232 of 2014 In High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 15.6.2020 Coram : Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and Honourable Mrs.Justice PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA Tax Case Appeal No.232 of 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax, Coimbatore ...Appellant Vs M/s.Sri Ranganathar Valves (P) Ltd., Coimbatore-25 ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 against order dated 18.11.2013 made in ITA.No.1684/Mds/2013 on file of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench for assessment year 2010-11. For Appellant: Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC & Ms.K.G.Usharani, SC For Respondent: Mr.A.S.Sriraman Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel and Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel appearing for appellant Revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel appearing for respondent. 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.232 of 2014 2. This appeal, filed by Revenue under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, Act) is directed against order dated 18.11.2013 made in ITA.No.1684/Mds/2013 on file of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench (for brevity, Tribunal) for assessment year 2010-11. 3. appeal has been admitted on 21.7.2014 on following substantial questions of law : i. Whether Tribunal was right in law in holding that assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 80IA without setting off losses/ unabsorbed depreciation pertaining to windmill, which were set off in earlier year against other business income of assessee following decision of this Court in 340 ITR 477 when same is pending appeal before Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) 1136 of 2011 ? 2. Whether Tribunal was correct in holding that initial assessment year in Section 80IA(5) would only mean year of claim of deduction under Section 80IA and not year of commencement of eligible business ? And 3. Whether Tribunal was right in holding that assessee has option to choose first/initial assessment year of claim for deduction under Section 80IA? 4. learned Senior Standing Counsel for appellant submits that 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.232 of 2014 above appeal is not pursued by Revenue on account of low tax effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.8.2019 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes. By said Circular, monetary limit for filing or pursuing appeal before High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that tax effect in this case is less than threshold limit. 5. In light of said submissions, above tax case appeal is dismissed on account of low tax effect. substantial questions of law framed are left open. In event tax effect is above threshold limit fixed in said circular, liberty is granted to Revenue to make mention to this Court to restore appeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. 15.6.2020 To Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench. RS 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.232 of 2014 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J RS TCA.No.232 of 2014 15.6.2020 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore v. Sri Ranganathar Valves (P) Ltd

Metadata

Judgment