Appeal by Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act dismissed as withdrawn due to low tax effect per Circular No. 17/2019. Substantial question of law left open; liberty granted to restore appeal if tax limit changes.
Tax Case Appeal dismissed as withdrawn on account of Low Tax Effect.
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 : 23.08.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
T.C.A.No.314 of 2013
Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai.
Vs.
K.Inbasagaran ... Respondent/Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, “D” Bench, dated 31.05.2012 in I.TA.No.952/Mds/2009, Assessment Year 1993-94.
Against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals IV Chennai dated 11.03.2009 in Appeal No.CIT (A) IV/CHE/793/0607 for the Assessment year 1993-94 and against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income tax Central Circle 1(2) Chennai 34 dated 12.02.1999 PAN/GIR No.47-075 PY-0029 for the Assessment Year 1993-94.
For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman
We have heard Mr.J.Narayanaswamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman for Mr.S.Sridhar, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee.
2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for brevity) is directed against the order dated 31.05.2012 made in I.TA.No.952/Mds/2009 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “D” Bench (“the Tribunal” for brevity) for the Assessment Year 1993-94.
3.The appeal was admitted on 26.11.2013 on the following substantial question of law:
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs.8 lakhs with respect to unexplained money in the form of fixed deposits by merely relying on the judicial proceedings concerning Prevention of Corruption Act, in which the revenue was not the party to that judicial proceedings?”
4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant submits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue on account of the Low Tax Effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. By the said Circular, the monetary limit for filing or pursuing an appeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is less than the threshold limit.
5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax Case Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low Tax Effect. The substantial question of law framed is left open. In the event the tax effect in this case 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. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS II)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
mkn
To
3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle (2), 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai-34.
4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle XIII, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai-34.
+1cc to Mr.Sridhar, Advocate Sr.42221
T.C.A.No.314 of 2013
mg[co] srg 02/11/2021
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai
K.Inbasagaran
T.S. Sivagnanam
Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
