Commissioner Of Income Taxchennai v. Dr.s.venkatesh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 28.11.2019 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARANANDTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN T.C.A.NO.193 OF 2018 Commissioner of Income TaxChennai. ... Appellant Vs. Dr.S.Venkatesh ...Respondent PRAYER: Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of Income TaxAct, 1961, against the order dated 15.07.2016 inI.T.A.No.1805/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal Madras 'C' Bench for the assessment year 2007-08 andagainst the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) -V, Chennai -34, dated 08/01/2014 made inITA.No.57/09-10(A)-V and against the order passed by the DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax, Circle -V, Chennai, dated 24/12/2009made in PAN/GIR.No. , for Assessment year 2007-08. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was made by N.KIRUBAKARAN, J.) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed against the order ofthe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 15.07.2016 passed inI.T.A.No.1805/Mds/2014 dismissing the appeal filed by theDepartment of Revenue against the order of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals) by which the appeal filed by the assesseewas partly allowed. 2. Heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned counsel for the appellant. 1/4 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. This Tax Case Appeal is admitted on the followingsubstantial questions of law: "1.Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case the tribunal wasright in holding that deleting the additionmade of on account of bad debt by merelyrelying on the provisions of Section 36(i)(vii) read with the decision of the Apex Courtin the case of TRF Ltd. by wrongly acceptingthe assessee's contention that the bad debtswere written off. 2.Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case the tribunal wasright in not considering the issue relating tounexplained credit with respect to the creditentries under the head transfer of loans andadvances, transfer of advance from customerand others. 3.Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case the tribunal wasright in holding that there is no concessionof liability and provisions of section 41(1)cannot be invoked even though the time limitto reclaim the amounts by the creditors hadlapsed under the Limitation Act. 4.Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case the tribunal wasright in holding that there is cessation ofliability and provisions of section 41(1)cannot be invoked even though the assessee hadcredited the unclaimed amounts to capitalaccount and had made a unilateral write off ofthe liability. 5.Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case the tribunal wasright in deleting the addition of unexplainedcredit with respect to the gift received fromthe assessees father even though the assesseehad failed to prove the credit worthiness ofthe donor and genuineness of the gift." 4. Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf ofthe appellant would submit that the tax effect in this case is 2/4 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ less than Rs.1 Crore and is covered by Circular No.17/2019 dated08.08.2019 issued by the Director, Central Board of DirectTaxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government ofIndia, Delhi. As per the said circular, the monetary limit tofile an appeal before the High Court is fixed at Rs.1 Crore. Inthis case, tax effect is less than Rs.1 Crore and therefore, theappeal has to be dismissed. 5. This Court perused the circular dated 08.08.2019 andParagraph No.2 of the Circular, which prescribes monetary limitfor filing appeal. Paragraph No.2 is usefully extracted asfollows: 4. Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf ofthe appellant would submit that the tax effect in this case is 2/4 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ less than Rs.1 Crore and is covered by Circular No.17/2019 dated08.08.2019 issued by the Director, Central Board of DirectTaxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government ofIndia, Delhi. As per the said circular, the monetary limit tofile an appeal before the High Court is fixed at Rs.1 Crore. Inthis case, tax effect is less than Rs.1 Crore and therefore, theappeal has to be dismissed. 5. This Court perused the circular dated 08.08.2019 andParagraph No.2 of the Circular, which prescribes monetary limitfor filing appeal. Paragraph No.2 is usefully extracted asfollows: 6.In view of the submissions made by the learned SeniorStanding Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and alsoin view of the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued bythe Director, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Delhi, this TaxCase Appeal is dismissed on account of tax effect. However, thesubstantial questions of law framed are left open. In the eventthe tax effect is above the limit fixed in the said circular,liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention to thisCourt to restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits.No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai. 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) -V,Chennai -34. 4.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Circle -V, Chennai. +1 cc to M/s.J.Narayanaswamy, Advocate Sr.No. 99553 AKM/08.01.2020/4P-6C / T.C.A.NO.193 OF 2018 4/4