Commissioner Of Income Tax,Tiruchirapalli.appellant/Repondent v. Https://Hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/Hcservices

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 10.12.2018 THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH Commissioner of Income Tax,Tiruchirapalli.Appellant/Repondent Vs. Shri K.PremanathanRespondent/Appellant Prayer :Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated25.02.2009, made in ITA No.182/mds/2007, against the order ofthe Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Tiruchirappalli,dated 25.10.2006, made in ITA No.385/CIT(A)/TRY/2005-2006, forthe assessment year 2001-2002 and against the order of theIncome Tax Officer, Ward IV(1), Tiruchirappalli, dated31.03.2004, made in PA No.TGIR No.AAGPD9096D for theassessment year 2001-2002. For respondent : Mr.S.Sridhar This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue,calling in question the correctness of the order passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai,dated 25.02.2009, in ITA No.182/mds/2007, by raising thefollowing substantial questions of law : https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the case back to the assessment officer to findout whether cash loans were availed from familymembers, when it is an admitted fact by therevenue, and directing the officer to delete thepenalty under Section 271D on the ground ofreasonable cause under Section 273B ? (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal was right in holdingthat in the absence of urgency/businessexpediency, acceptance of loan in cash in excessof Rs.20,000/- from the relatives would ipso factoconstitute bonafide belief that it would notattract provisions of Section 269SS ? (iii) Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal was right in holdingthat in the absence of urgency/businessexpediency, acceptance of loan in cash in excessof Rs.20,000/- from the relatives would constitute'reasonable cause' under Section 273B ? 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learnedStanding Counsel for the Department brought to our notice theCircular instruction issued by the Central Board of DirectTaxes vide Circular No.3/2018, dated 11.7.2018, wherein, it isstipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by theDepartment before the High Court in cases where the tax effectdoes not exceed Rs.50.00 lakhs. 3. In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and, therefore, the appealfiled by the Revenue is dismissed, as not pressed, keepingopen the substantial questions of law for determination inappropriate cases. No costs. Sd/-Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar dixit To 1. The Judicial Member/Accountant Member Incoem Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bech 'C' Chennai. Incoem Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bech 'C' Chennai. 2. The Commssioenr of Income Tax (Appeals), Tiruchirappalli Tiruchirappalli 3. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (i/c) Range -IV, Tiruchirappalli. Range -IV, Tiruchirappalli. 4. The Income Tax Officer, Ward IV (1) Tiruchirappalli. Ward IV (1) Tiruchirappalli. +1cc to Mr.S.Premalatha, Advocate SR.No.84934 MR(CO)GMY(08/01/2019) TCA No.1159 OF 2009