Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle Iv, Chennai v. M/S.best Choice

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 30.03.2021 CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI T.C.A.No.497 of 2017 Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle IV,Chennai. ... AppellantVs. M/s.Best Choice,No.176F, Trivandrum Road,Tirunelveli 627 003.... Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras, “B” Bench, dated 05.08.2016 in I.TA.No.1879/Mds/2014,Assessment Year 2009-10. Appeal against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Central)-I, 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34made in ITA No.261/10-11 dated 28/03/2014 for the AssessmentYear 2009-10. Appeal against the order of the Deputy Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Central Circle IV (1), Chennai made in PANNo.AAHFB7067M dated 30/12/2010 for the Assessment Year 2009-2010. For Appellant : Mrs.V.Pushpa Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel for theappellant/Revenue and Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan for M/s.SubbarayaAiyar, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed againstthe order dated 05.08.2016 made in I.TA.No.1879/Mds/2014 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “B” Bench(for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2009-10. 3.The Revenue has raised the following substantial questionof law in the above appeal :“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase and in law, the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunalwas right in holding that explanation 1 to section 32 willnot apply for the repair and renovation expenditureincurred by the assessee on the leasehold land towardsinterior decoration, flooring, painting and temporarypartition, etc.?” 4.The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant submitsthat the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue on accountof the Low Tax Effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019 dated08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. By thesaid Circular, the monetary limit for filing or pursuing anappeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 crore.It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is lessthan the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax CaseAppeal is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low TaxEffect. The substantial question of law framed is left open. Inthe event the tax effect in this case is above the thresholdlimit fixed in the said Circular, liberty is granted to theRevenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal tobe heard and decided on merits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IX) //True Copy// mknTo Sub Assistant Registrar 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “B” Bench Chennai, “B” Bench 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle IV, Chennai. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I, 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34. 5.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle IV (1), Chennai. +1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate Sr.20964 +1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan, Advocate Sr.20968 T.C.A.No.497 of 2017 SR-II[co]srg 18/08/2021