Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Tiruchirapalli v. Saroja & Others L/H Narayanan (Huf) 6-C, Cauvery Nagar, Near Railady, Mayiladuthurai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 25.02.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI T.C.A.No.901 of 2013 Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle,Tiruchirapalli.... AppellantVs. Saroja & OthersL/H Narayanan (HUF)6-C, Cauvery Nagar,Near Railady,Mayiladuthurai. ... Respondent Tax Case Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai, “B” Bench, dated 23.04.2010 in I.T.(SS)No.11/Mds/2009, Block Assessment Year 01.04.1997 to 23.05.2003.Appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals),Thiruchirapallidated30/12/2008madeinITA.No.263/06-07 against the order of the Assistant Commissioner of IncomeTax, Central Circle II, Tiruchirappalli dated 30/05/2005, madein u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar Senior Standing Counsel and Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani Standing Counsel For Respondent : No appearance JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel, assisted by Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani, learned Standing Counselfor the appellant/Revenue. 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed againstthe order dated 23.04.2010 made in I.T.(SS)No.11/Mds/2009 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “B” Bench(for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Block Assessment Year01.04.1997 to 23.05.2003. 3.The appeal was admitted on 07.08.2014 on the followingsubstantial questions of law: “1.Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right indeleting the addition made on account of allegeddeficit of stock of gold ?2.Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right indeleting the addition on account of unaccountedpurchase with reference to seized material? 3.Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right inholding that disallowance made under Section 40A(3)was not proper?” 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue onaccount of the Low Tax Effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. Bythe said 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 questions of law framed are left open.In the 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/- Asst.Registrar (CS VI) /true copy/Sub Asst. RegistrarmknTo1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “B” Bench2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Tiruchirapalli.3.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)Thiruchirappalli4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle-II, Tiruchirappalli+1 cc to M/s.T.R.Senthilkumar Advocate sr11608/2021T.C.A.No.901 of 2013 aa30/03/2021