Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Ii, Chennai v. C.p.kunhimohammed

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 22.02.2021 CORAM:THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Commissioner of Income Tax,Central II, Chennai.... Appellant/AppellantVs.C.P.Kunhimohammed... Respondent/Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras, "A" Bench, Chennai dated 03.06.2009 in I.TA.(SS).No.66/Mds/2008 Block Assessment period: 1996-97 to 2001-02 andfrom 01.04.2002 to 22.01.2003 and this appeal preferred againstthe Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)II, Chennai order dated25.03.2008 made in A.No. CIT(A)/CHE/149/2007-2008 for theassessment year Block assessment for the period ending22.01.2003 and against the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle 11(3) Chennai 34 order dated 31.12.2007 made inAAPPK2443N/26749K for the assessment year relevant to Blockperiod 1996-1997 to 2001-2002 from 01.04.2002 to 22.01.2003. We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.N.V.Balaji, learnedcounsel for the respondent/assessee. 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed againstthe order dated 03.06.2009 made in I.TA.(SS).No.66/Mds/2008 onthe file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, "A" https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Block Assessmentperiod: 1996-97 to 2001-02 and from 01.04.2002 to 22.01.2003.3.The appeal was admitted on 16.11.2009 on the followingsubstantial question of law: “Whether on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Appellate Tribunal was right inupholding the order of the Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeals) deleting the addition forRs.36,26,000/- made the assessing officer beingunexplained investment in M/s.Kerala RoadwayLtd., in the block assessment made u/s 158BC readwith Section 263 of the Income Tax Act?” 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 these cases areless than 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. True Copy 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)II, Chennai 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income TaxCentral Circle II(3)Chennai 34. +1 CC to Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Advocate sr 10254. +1 Cc to Mr.N.V.Balaji, Advocate sr 10853. T.C.A.No.1141 of 2009 KJ(CO) SP(19/03/2021)