Commissioner Of Income Tax Central I v. M/S. Ramachandra Educational And Health Trust, 22 Sir C.v.raman Road, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 13.12.2021 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVANAND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.No.164 of 2013 Commissioner of Income Tax Central I, 108, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. Versus ... Appellant M/s. Ramachandra Educational and Health Trust, 22 Sir C.V.Raman Road, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018.PAN: ... Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Chennai, “A” Bench, dated 11.10.2012 in I.TA.No.985/Mds/2012against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals-I,Chennai, dated 21.02.2012 in ITA No.132/2010-2011, PANNo.AAA7S2283D for the Assessment Year 2008-2009 against theorder of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CentralCircle – I(3), Chennai in PAN/GIR No.AAA7S2283D for theAssessment Year 2008-2009. (Judgment was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant /Revenue, challenging the order dated 11.10.2012 passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench, inI.T.A.No.985/Mds/2012, relating to the assessment year 2008-09. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.By order dated 23.04.2013, this court admitted theaforesaid tax case appeal on the following substantial questionsof law: “(i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the appellate Tribunal wasright in deleting the addition of Rs.29,10,287/- whcihwas invested in M/s.Egmore Benefit Fund Ltd., which iscontrary to Section 11(5) of the Income Tax Act? (ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal wasright in deleting the addition of Rs.96,22,500/- underSection 40(a)(i) without considering the observationsof the Authority for Advance Ruling vide its orderdated 29.05.2009 in Misc.No.03/673 of 2006 inassessee's own case? (iii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal wasright in deleting the addition of Rs.96,22,500/- underSection 40(a)(i) relying on the judgment of theSpecial Bench of the Tribunal in the case ofM/s.Merilyn Shipping and Transports, which is stayedby the High Court of Andhra Pradesh? 3.When the matter was taken up for consideration, thelearned counsel for the appellant / Revenue brought to the noticeof this court the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued bythe Central Board Direct Taxes, wherein, it is stipulated thatappeal shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before theHigh Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceedRs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). It is also submitted thatthe tax effect in this appeal is less than the threshold limit. 4.In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by thelearned counsel for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeal,wherein, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetarylimit imposed, is dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open thesubstantial questions of law for determination in an appropriatecase. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-V) //True Copy// av Sub Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench, 2. Commissioner of Income Tax Central I, 108, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Income Tax (Appeals)-I, 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34. 4. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – I(3), Chennai. T.C.A.No.164 of 2013 SMI(CO)SU(04/01/2022)