Commissioner Of Income Tax,Circle Ii v. Dr.k.premraj

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 19.03.2021CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVIT.C.A.No.379 of 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax,Circle II,121, M.G. Road,Chennai – 600 034. Vs. ... Appellant Dr.K.Premraj,No.15, Old No.8,Third Main Road,R.A.Puram Chennai – 600 028... Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras, “C” Bench, dated 30.10.2013 in I.TA.No.1270/Mds/2013,Assessment Year 2008-09 against the order of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax(Appeals)-VI chennai in ITA No.358/11-12 dated24.12.2012 relevant to the Assessment year 2008-2009 against theassessment order dated 27.12.2010 by the Assistant Commissionerof Income Tax, Central circle I(2)i/c Chennai-34. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent : Mr.N.V.Balaji JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.N.V.Balaji, learnedcounsel for the respondent/assessee. 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed againstthe order dated 30.10.2013 made in I.TA.No.1270/Mds/2013 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “C” Bench(for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2008-09. 3.The appeal was admitted on 26.08.2014 on the followingsubstantial questions of law:“1.Whether on the facts and in the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ circumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding that thetransfer of goodwill is capital receipt withoutnoting that the assessee has extinguished hisright to carry out his profession in the name ofDr.Prem's Eye Clinic which is taxable underSection 28(va) of the Income Tax Act? 2.Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in ignoring theletter of the assessee dated 27.12.2010 in whichthe assessee himself has admitted to tax themoney received as capital gains?” 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 questions of law framed are left open.In the 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 /TRUE COPY/ mknTo Sub-Assistant Registrar 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “C” Bench 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle II, 121, M.G. Road, Chennai – 600 034. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-VI, Chennai Chennai 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1,(2)I/c Chennai-34. Central Circle 1,(2)I/c Chennai-34. +1cc to Mr.N.V.BALAJI, ADVOCATE, SR.NO. 17834 +1cc to Mr.T.RAVIKUMAR, ADVOCATE, SR.NO. 17827 T.C.A.No.379 of 2014SS(CO)KKN 26.04.2021