Dismissed

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Indowind Engery Ltd.

Madras HC19 Sept 2019TCA/368/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Revenue filed tax appeals under Section 260A challenging ITAT orders. The High Court, noting that the tax effect was below the Rs.1 Crore limit specified in CBIC Circular No.17/2019, dismissed the appeals by treating them as withdrawn. The court kept the substantial questions of law open.

What did the court decide?

Appeals filed by the Revenue dismissed as withdrawn; substantial questions of law kept open for determination in appropriate cases.

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Indowind Engery Ltd. — Income Tax | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 19.9.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶5

Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.368 & 369 of 2010

¶6

Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai Appellant in both cases

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Indowind Energy Limited, Kothari Building 4th Floor, 114 Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Chennai 600 034. Respondent in both cases

¶9

Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 10.7.2009 made in ITA No.2085/Mds/2008 & 2086/Mds/2008 Against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals III, chennai in ITA.NO. 629/2006-07/A III and ITA.NO.368/2007-08/ A III dated 28/07/2008 against the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle II (3), chennai 34 dated 08.12.2006 for the Assessment Year 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 dated 11.12.2007.

¶10

For Appellant : Mr.Rajesh, Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriram for Mr.S.Sridhar

¶11

COMMON JUDGMENT (Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J)

¶12

These Tax Case Appeals have been filed by the Revenue, calling in question the correctness of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 10.7.2009 made in ITA No.2085/Mds/2008 & 2086/Mds/2008, for the Assessment Years 2004-05 and 200506, by raising the following substantial questions of law:

¶13

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

¶14

"Assessment Year 2004-05:-

¶15

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that Claim from Indo Net Global Ltd for Rs.5,55,173/towards reimbursement of expenditure incurred by on behalf of the assessee herein is allowable as deduction?

¶16

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that amount spent by Indo Net Global Ltd towards the assessee company can be treated as loan paid to the assessee company and only 12% interest on such amount of compensation of Rs.50 lakhs had to be treated as allowable expenditure?

¶17

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the 50% of the total amount paid on 27.6.2002 towards UTI Lease Management fee aggregating to Rs.61.2 lakhs is allowable as deduction during this assessment year?

¶18

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the expenses claimed towards travel/advertisement/rates and taxes with respect to project of commissioning of wind mills is allowable as deduction?

¶19

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that treating the advance paid to its group company and not recovered as a business loss and allowing deduction? Assessment Year 2005-06:-

¶20

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the 50% of the total amount paid on 27.6.2002 towards UTI Lease Management fee aggregating to Rs.61.2 Lakhs is allowable as deduction during this assessment year?"

¶21

When the matters are taken up for hearing, learned Senior Standing Counsel brought to our notice the Circular instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No.17/2019 dated 8th August 2019, 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.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore).

¶22

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

¶23

In the instant cases, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the Appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed, as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in appropriate cases. No costs.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶26

//True Copy//

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

ssk.
To
1. Commissioner of Income Tax
Chennai
2. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
'B' Bench, Chennai.
3. The Assistant Commissioner
of Income Tax,
Company Circle II(3), Chennai.
4. The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals III, chennai 34
+1cc to Mr.S.Sridhar , Advocate SR.No. 80412
T.C.(A) Nos.368 & 369 of 2010
A.SK(15/11/2019)

¶29

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

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Indowind Engery Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Indowind Engery Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.R.Sekar Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

K.N.Subramaniam Vs The District Collector

R.Jeyabal Vs The District Collector

The Commissioneer of Income Vs Black Thunder Theme Park Ltd.

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S Mount Mettur

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs United India Insurance Company