Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Tiruchirapalli v. Https://Hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/Hcservices

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.8.2019 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.241 of 2011 Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Tiruchirapalli...AppellantVsSmt.U.Srilakshmi, Trichy-3. ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961againsttheorderdated23.12.2010madeinITA.No.160/Mds/2009 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench for the assessment year 2005-06against the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-IV WilliamsRoad,Contonment,Thiruchirapalli 620 001 dated 17.12.2008 inITA.No.285/07-08 GI NO./PA.NO. AAFPU 4705R for theAssessment year 2005-2006 and against the order of theAssistant Commissioner of income tax Company Circle IIITiruchirapalli dated 31.12.2007 PAN/GIR NO.AAFPU 4705R forthe Assessment Year 2005-06 respectively. For Appellant: Mr.M.Swaminathan, SSC assisted byMs.V.Pushpa, SC andMs.S.Premalatha, SCFor Respondent:Mr.A.S.Sriraman Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel, assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa and Ms.S.Premalatha,learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant –Revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel appearing forthe respondent – assessee. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ dated 23.12.2010 made in ITA. No.160/Mds/2009 on the fileof the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench forthe assessment year 2005-06.3. The appeal was admitted on 11.7.2011 on the followingsubstantial questions of law : “i. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal was right inholding that the Assessing Officer wasnot justified in rejecting the books ofaccounts in spite of the seriousdefects found and in deleting theestimated addition made in theassessment ? ii. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal was right indeleting the addition under Section 40A(3) on the ground that no singlepayment exceeded the prescribed limitof Rs.20,000/- even though theAssessing Officer had established thatthe payment to the same person had beensplit artificially and shown in thenames of fictitious persons ?iii. Whether, on the facts and inthe circumstances of the case, theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal was rightin holding that once gross profitaddition was made on estimate basis thedeclared profit, no disallowance underSection 40A(3) could be made? Andiv. Without prejudice to theprevious questions, whether, on thefacts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunalwas right in holding that nodisallowance under Section 40A(3) couldbe made even after deleting the grossprofit addition made by the Assessing Officer?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenueon account of the low tax effect in terms of CircularNo.17/2019 dated 08.8.2019 issued by the Central Board ofDirect Taxes. By the said Circular, the monetary limit forfiling or pursuing an appeal before the High Court has beenincreased to Rs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above taxcase appeal is dismissed on account of the low tax effect.The substantial questions of law framed are left open. Inthe event the tax effect is above the threshold limit fixedin the said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue tomake a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to beheard and decided on merits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS) tax effect in this case is less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above taxcase appeal is dismissed on account of the low tax effect.The substantial questions of law framed are left open. Inthe event the tax effect is above the threshold limit fixedin the said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue tomake a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to beheard and decided on merits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS) //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarRSTOTHE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI 'D' BENCH.2.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS),THIRUCHIRAPALLI3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISIONER,INCOME TAX COMPANY CIRCLEIII,TIRUCHIRAPALLI+1cc to Mr.m.Swaminathan , Advocate SR.No. 70578+1cc to Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate SR.No. 70612TCA.No.241 of 2011A.SK(15/10/2019)