Dismissed

Commissioner of Income Tax I v. M/S Atlantic Fabrics

Madras HC19 Dec 2018TCA/1216/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Revenue filed a Tax Case Appeal challenging the tribunal's allowance of depreciation on civil works as 80% against the limit of 10%. Upon learning that Circular No. 3/2018 prohibits departmental appeals with tax effects below Rs. 50 lakhs, the High Court dismissed the appeal with costs.

What did the court decide?

The appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed, keeping the substantial question of law open.

Commissioner of Income Tax I Vs M/S Atlantic Fabrics — Income Tax | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 19.12.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶6

Tax Case Appeal No.1216 of 2010

¶7

Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Tiruchirapalli. ...Appellant

¶8

Vs. M/s.Atlantic Fabrics ...Respondent

¶9

Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench, dated 24.06.2010, made in ITA No.431/Mds/2010 against the order dated 26.02.2010 made in ITA. No.521/08-09, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Tiruchirapalli for the assessment year 2006 - 07 against the assessment order U/S.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - II, Trichy, dated 30.12.2008 for the assessment year 2006-07.

¶10

For respondent : No appearance

¶11

This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue, calling in question the correctness of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 24.06.2010, in ITA No.431/Mds/2010, by raising the following substantial question of law :

¶12

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

right in directing the Assessing Officer to allow depreciation at 80% on civil works and electrical installations which were separate from the Wind Mill and, therefore, were entitled for depreciation only at 10% ?

¶15

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Standing Counsel for the Department brought to our notice the Circular instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No.3/2018, dated 11.7.2018, wherein, it is stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.50.00 lakhs.

¶16

In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed and, therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, as not pressed, keeping open the substantial question of law for determination in appropriate cases. No costs.

¶17

dixit
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CO)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai 'C' Bench,
Chennai.
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)
Tiruchirapalli.
3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle - II, Trichy.
+1CC TO MR.M.SWAMINATHA, ADVOCATE SR.NO.88244
TCA No.1216 OF 2010
ssd(CO)
kak(30/01/2019)

¶18

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Commissioner of Income Tax I v. M/S Atlantic Fabrics

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Commissioner of Income Tax I v. M/S Atlantic Fabrics

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Integrated Finance Co. Ltd. Vs the Deputy Commissioner of

Integrated Finance Co. Ltd. Vs the Deputy Commissioner of

The Commissioner of Vs M/S.Kumbakonam Mutual

M/S Store N Move Pvt. Ltd, Vs Mr. Ysp Balraj

P. Marimuthu Vs The Commissioner

The Commissioner of Vs M.Karthikeyan