Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Ii v. Mr.r.s.suriya

CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA Commissioner of Income Tax, Central II,No.108, Nungambakkam High Road,Chennai – 600 034. ... AppellantVs. Mr.R.S.Suriya15/17, Krishna Street,T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017.... 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 08.04.2015 in I.TA.No.1241/Mds/2013,Assessment Year 2009-10. Preferred against the Order dated 27.03.2013 passed by theCommissioner of Income Tax (A) II, Chennai, made in ITA.No.198/11-12/A.II Against the Order dated 30.12.2011 passed byAssistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (5),Chennai, made in PAN No.ALRPSO353G.For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent : Mr.R.Sivaraman JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.R.Sivaraman, learnedcounsel for the respondent/assessee. 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainst the order dated 08.04.2015 made in I.TA.No.1241/Mds/2013on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “B”Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2009-10. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The appeal was admitted on 24.11.2015 on the followingsubstantial question of law: “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding thatthe amount received as advance as per the agreementsentered into by the assessee with different filmproducers, promising to render professional services werenot taxable as income, even though the assessee wasfollowing cash system of accounting?” 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case is lessthan the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax CaseAppeal is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low TaxEffect.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 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-III)//True Copy//Sub Assistant Registrar mkn To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “B” Bench 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central II, No.108, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. 3.The Commissioner of Income TAX (A)II, Chennai. 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (5), Chennai. Central Circle II (5), Chennai. +1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel, Advocate, S.R.No. 22087 T.C.A.No.967 of 2015 JPL(CO)GN(28/06/2021)