TCA.No.236 of 2020 In High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 26.08.2020 Coram : Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and Honourable Mrs.Justice PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA Tax Case Appeal No.236 of 2020 Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai ...Appellant Vs M/s.Wayne Burt Petrochemicals (P) Ltd, (formerly known as Bailey Hydro Power Pvt Ltd) SIPCOT Industrial Park, Irrungattukottai Sriperumbudhur Taluk, Chennai 602 105 PAN AABCB 1804F ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 against order dated 03.09.2018 made in ITA.No.1207/chny/2018 on file of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar 1/5 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.236 of 2020 Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for appellant Revenue. 2. This appeal, filed by Revenue under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against order dated 03.09.2018 made in ITA.No. 1025/chny/2018 on file of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai for assessment year 2013-14. 3. appeal is admitted on following substantial questions of law: 1.Whether on facts and in circumstances of case Tribunal was right in allowing depreciation at 60% in respect of design and assembly drawings of hydraulics cylinders, Bill of materials and other components in CD as computer software and allowing higher depreciation at 60% especially when assets 2/5 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.236 of 2020 was not software program with design, pre embedded readily available for purchase in market but is developed design as per requirements specified for standard specification, in specific readable software which is in nature of intangible asset, eligible for depreciation at 25% only? 2. Whether reasoning and finding of Tribunal is proper especially when consideration of 11,00,000/- US dollars has been paid for license agreement with AE Bailey International Corporation USA in respect of impugned assets shown is intangible assets which is not covered under heading computer software eligible for 60% depreciation? 4. learned Senior Standing Counsel for appellant submits that 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 3/5 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.236 of 2020 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 question of law framed is 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. (T.S.S., J.) (P.S.N., J.) 26.08.2020 Internet: Yes /No Index : Yes/No To Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai 4/5 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.236 of 2020 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J sk TCA.No.236 of 2020 26.08.2020 5/5 http://www.judis.nic.in Commissioner of Income-tax, Chennai v. Wayne Burt Petrochemicals (P) Ltd. (formerly known as Bailey Hydro Power Pvt. Ltd.)