Commissioner Of Income Tax,Corporate Circle 3(1),Chennai v. M/S.tallboy Stationery Private Limited,New

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMand The Honourable Mr.Justice SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP T.C.A.Nos.807 and 808 of 2016 Commissioner of Income Tax,Corporate Circle 3(1),Chennai. ..Appellant in both Appeals -vs- M/s.Tallboy Stationery Private Limited,New No.130, Old No.34,Nelson Manickam Road,Aminjikarai, Chennai-600 029.PAN: AACCT 3483H ..Respondent in both Appeals Appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the order dated 29.04.2016 made in I.T.A.Nos.2291 &2292/Mds/2015 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2008-09respectively and as against the order dated 14.10.2015 on thefile of the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) inI.T.A.Nos.206/2014-2015 & 306/2014-2015 respectively and asagainst the order dated 29.03.2014 & 10.02.2014 of the AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax, Chennai for the Assessment year2008-2009 & 2011-2012 respectively. These appeals, by the appellant/Revenue, filed under Section260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are directed against the orderdated 29.04.2016, made in I.T.A.Nos.2291 & 2292/Mds/2015 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai forthe assessment years 2011-12 and 2008-09 respectively. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The appeals were admitted on 16.11.2016, on the followingsubstantial questions of law:- “(i) Whether the Tribunal was correct in lawin holding that the addition could not have beenmade by the Assessing Officer in the hands ofthe Assessee company as it was not a registeredshareholder of M/s.Chennai Micro Prints PrivateLimitedfromwhichAssesseereceivedloan/advance? and (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case and in law, the Tribunal correctlyinterpreted the provisions of Section 2(22)(e)in the light of the clarification given by theBoard vide Circular No.495 dated 22.9.1987?” 3.Heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counseland Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Junior Standing Counsel for theappellant/Revenue and Ms.S.Sriniranjani, learned counsel for therespondent/assessee. 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for theappellant/Revenue submits that the above appeals are not pursuedby the Revenue on account of the low tax effect in terms ofCircular No.17/2019, dated 08.08.2019 issued by the CentralBoard of Direct Taxes. By the said Circular, the monetary limitfor filing or pursuing an appeal before the High Court has beenincreased to Rs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that the taxeffect in these cases is less than the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above tax caseappeals are dismissed on account of the low tax effect. Thesubstantial questions of law framed are left open. In the event,the 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 appeals to be heard and decided onmerits. No costs. s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS III) True Copy To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)Corporate Circle 3(1) ChennaiCorporate Circle 3(1) Chennai 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income TaxCompany Circle III(1) ChennaiCompany Circle III(1) Chennai +1 CC to Mr.G. Baskar, Advocate sr 41457 +1 CC to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate sr 41542. T.C.A.Nos.807 & 808 of 2016 SVI(CO)SP(14/09/2021)