Commissioner Of Income Tax Central I v. V.deenadayalavel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN ANDTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Commissioner of Income Tax Central I,121, M.G.Road,Chennai 600 034. ...Appellant in all TCAs -vs- V.Deenadayalavel ...Respondent in all TCAs Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the common order dated 22.06.2012 passed bythe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Chennai, inI.T.A.Nos.532 to 537/Mds/2012. Against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, 46,Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34, dated 12.12.2011I.T.A.No.135 to 140/10-11, PAN/GIR/No. for theAssessment Year 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09,2009-10 respectively and against the Assistant Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Central Circle IV(3), dated 29.12.2010,PAN/GIR.No. ward/circle/range:ACIT, Central Circle IV(3) status: Individual for the Assessment Year 2009-10, 2008-09, 2007-08, 2006-07, 2005-06, 2004-05, Respectively. (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) These tax case appeals have been filed by the appellant /Revenue, challenging the common order dated 22.06.2012 passed bythe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos.532 to 537/Mds/2012, relating to the assessment years2004-05 to 2009-2010, by raising the following substantialquestions of law:- "(i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal wasright in not considering that the income from“brokerage and commission” is not expressly mentionedin the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement betweenIndia and Singapore and non-taxing the same is againstArticle 23 of the DTA Agreement? (ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal wasright in not giving opportunity to the Assessingofficer to verify the details of the 'brokerage andcommission' received by way of TT's were firstreceived by the foreign Banks and then to the SouthIndian Bank at Chennai, which is against the principleof Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 ?” 2. When the matters were 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 thatappeals 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 these appeals is less than the threshold limit. 3. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by thelearned counsel for the appellant / Revenue, the presentappeals, wherein, the tax effect is said to be less than themonetary limit imposed, are dismissed as withdrawn, keeping openthe substantial questions of law for determination inappropriate cases. No costs. Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar psa/av To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Chennai. “C” Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax Central I, 121, M.G.Road,Chennai 600 034. 121, M.G.Road,Chennai 600 034. 3.The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD) ,Central Circle IV(3), Chennai.Central Circle IV(3), Chennai. 4.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IChennai. Chennai. Tax Case Appeal Nos.546 to 552 of 2014 BP(CO)PM/29/07/2022