Apportioning an appeal filed by Revenue challenging penalty deletions under Sections 271D and 271E of the Income Tax Act. The court notes submission by the Department's counsel that the appeal exceeds a monetary threshold for filing before the High Court but falls below it, leading to the dismissal of the appeal based on lack of jurisdiction.
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 : 14.03.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
TCA.No.1464 of 2010
The Commissioner of Income - tax - VII, Chennai. ... Appellant/Respondent
Vs
Shri.D.Mangilal, 2/31, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Navalur Road, Kelambakkam - 603 103. PAN No.AAIPM6720H ... Respondent/Appellant
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai, dated 05.02.2010 in I.TA.No.1293/Mds/2008. Appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IX, Chennai, dated 24.03.2008 in ITA.Nos.254 & 255/0708 and against the order of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Tambaram Range, Tambaram, dated 27.12.2007 in PA.No.AAIPM6720M.
For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.R.Sivaraman
JUDGMENT
(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 05.02.2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1293/Mds/2008, relating to the assessment year 20042005.
of law:
“(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in deleting the levy of penalty under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, even though the assessee was compelled to disclosed such cash transaction during the search in the premises of the assessee?
(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in deleting the levy of penalty under 271E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, even though the assessee was compelled to disclose such cash transaction during the search in the premises of the assessee?
3.When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue brought to the notice of this court the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board Direct Taxes, wherein, it is stipulated that appeal 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). It is also submitted that the tax effect in this appeal is less than the threshold limit.
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 questions of law for determination in an appropriate case. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-V)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
av
To
TCA.No.1464 of 2010
KK(CO) SU(07/04/2022)
The Commissioner of Income - tax - VII, Chennai
Shri.D.Mangilal
R. MAHADEVAN
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
