Commissioner Of Income Tax I v. Mr.ram Ravikirhsnan

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMandThe Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Commissioner of Income Tax I,121, M.G.Road, Chennai....Appellant/RespondentVs Mr.Ram RavikirhsnanPAN: AACPR3430R...Respondent/Appellant APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 17.06.2014 made in ITA.No.1884/MDS/2012 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench forthe assessment year 2009-10 against the order of Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals)V, Chennai 34 dated 11.09.2012 in I.T.A. V,I.T.A. No. 213/2011-2012 against the order of the AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle V(3) Chennai dated20.12.2011 in PAN/GIR No. . We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel, assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned counsel appearingfor the appellant/revenue and Mr.R.Lakshmi Ratan, learnedcounsel appearing for the respondent/assessee. 2.This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated17.06.2014 made in ITA.No.1884/MDS/2012 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench for theassessment year 2009-10. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The appeal has been filed by raising the followingsubstantial questions of law : “1.Whether the ITAT is granting benefit ofexemption u/s.54 of the Act when the assesseedid not invest the Capital Gain in any CapitalGains Account scheme in any Nationalized Bank,before the due date of filing of return, thusthe assessee did not satisfy the conditions laiddown in Section 54(2) of the IT Act? 2.Whether the ITAT is right in grantingbenefit of exemption u/s.54 of the Act, when theproperty which does not fits into thedescription of the Long Term Capital Asset inSection 54 that is, being building or landsappurtenant thereto, and being a residentialhouse, the income of which is chargeable underthe "Income from House Property"?" 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 08.8.2019 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 on account of the low tax effect. Thesubstantial questions of law framed are left open. In the eventthe tax effect is above the threshold limit fixed in the saidcircular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention tothis Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided onmerits. No costs. Assistant Registrar(CS-I) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)VChennai 34.Chennai 34. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income TaxCompany Circle V(3) ChennaiCompany Circle V(3) Chennai TCA.No.457 of 2018 KK(CO)SP(04/11/2019)