Commissioner Of Income Tax,Central Circle, Chennai-600 034 v. Late B.manivanan,Rep., By L/H Shanthi,Brn Apartments

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 22.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.676 of 2013 Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle, Chennai-600 034. .. Appellant/Appellant -vs- Late B.Manivanan,Rep., by L/H Shanthi,BRN Apartments, No.18. Rajarathinam Street,Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010.PAN: .. Respondent/Respondent Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961,against the order dated 22.01.2013, on the file of theIncome-tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.(SS)A.No.18/Mds/2012 for the assessment block period01.04.1990 to 20.07.2000 Against the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax Appeals ,chennai dated19.03.2012 made in ITA.NO.397/2008-2009 and Against theorder of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralcircle IV, (2), Chennai,dated 29.12.2008 made in PAN/GIRNO.714 -M. For Appellant:Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar,Senior Standing Counsel :assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani,Junior Standing CounselFor Respondent :No appearance ****** (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal filed by the appellant/Revenue under Section260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is directed against theorder dated 22.01.2013, passed by the Income-tax AppellateTribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.(SS)A.No.18/Mds/2012for the assessment block period 01.04.1990 to 20.07.2000. 2.The above appeal was admitted, on 07.10.2013, on thefollowing substantial questions of law:-“(i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case the Tribunal wasright in deleting the penalty u/s.158BFA(2)of Rs.21,15,034/- when the assessee has notfiled the Block return of income voluntarily.(ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in deleting thepenalty u/s.158BFA(2) for the reasons thatthe claim of the assessee was disallowed inthe block assessment and the income wasassessed therein it does not mean thatpenalty would automatically operate?” 3.Heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned JuniorStanding Counsel for the appellant. 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 08.08.2019 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 thetax 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. In https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the 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 Registrar abr To 1.The Assistant Commissioner of Income tax, Central Circle IV(2), Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. 3.The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai+1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar , Advocate SR.No. 72307T.C.A.No.676 of 2013A.SK(14/11/2019)A.SK(26/11/2019)