The High Court dismissed the Revenue's tax case appeal as withdrawn due to a tax effect below the ₹1 crore threshold stipulated in Central Board of Direct Taxes Circular No.17/2019, keeping the substantial question of law open.
Appeal dismissed as withdrawn subject to keeping open the substantial question of law for future determination.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.02.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
T.C.A.No.1452 of 2010
Commissioner of Income Tax - I, Tiruchirapalli.
Versus
Dr.Punithavathy Kannan, K.P.Hospital, No.96 Kovai Road, Karur.
...Respondent/Appellant
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “D” Bench, dated 09.07.2010 in I.TA.No.565/Mds/2010, against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Tiruchirapalli made in ITA No.561/08-09 dated 04/02/2010 and against the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-II, Trichy, made in PAN.AHEPK1919R dated 26.12.2008.
For Appellant : Mrs.V.Pushpa Junior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : M/s.R.Venkatanarayanan for Mr.Subbaraya Aiyar
J U D G M E N T
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.)
This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the order dated 09.07.2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench 'D', Chennai, in I.TA.No.565/Mds/2010, relating to the assessment year 2006-07.
2.By order dated 08.02.2011, this court admitted the aforesaid tax case appeal on the following substantial question of law:
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding
that the assessee was entitled for depreciation at the rate of 80% applicable to windmills even on the electrical fittings and civil work, on which depreciation was allowable only at the rate of 10%?"
4.In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned 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 question of law for determination in an appropriate case. No costs.
Assistant Registrar (CS-III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
av
To
T.C.A.No.1452 of 2010
BS (CO) PR (28/02/2022) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Commissioner of Income Tax - I, Tiruchirapalli
Dr. Punithavathy Kannan
R. MAHADEVAN
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
