Commissioner Of Income Tax,Ward I (4), Tirunelveli v. M/S.shifa Hospitals

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 19.02.2021 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI T.C.A.Nos.374 to 376 of 2017 Commissioner of Income Tax,Ward I (4), Tirunelveli.... Appellant in all 3 TCAs Vs. M/s.Shifa Hospitals,82, Kailasapuram Middle Street,Tirunelveli – 627 001.... Respondent in all 3 TCAs Appeals preferred under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras, "B" Bench, dated 14.12.2016 in I.TA.Nos.1735to 1737/Mds/2016, Assessment Year 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13,appeal against the order dated 28.03.2014 made in PAN/GIRNo. on the file of the Income Tax Officer, Ward I(4), Tirnelveli for the Assessment year 2010-2011, 2011-2012 &2012-2013. For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan(in all 3 TCAs) Senior Standing Counsel (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.T.Vasudevan, learnedcounsel for the respondent/assessee. 2.The appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) are directed against the order dated 14.12.2016 made in I.TA.Nos.1735 to1737/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai, "B" Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) forthe Assessment Years 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13. 3.The appeals were admitted on 11.09.2012 on thefollowing substantial questions of law: “1)Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal was right in holdingthat the revision order passed bytheCommissioner of Income Tax under Section 263are without concrete findings when theAssessing Officer passed the assessment orderwithout conducting any enquiry on the surveyfindings? 2)Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal was right in quashingthe revision order passed under Section 263wherein the Assessing Officer was directed toredo the assessment after causing necessaryenquiries to be made and in accordance withlaw? 3)Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal was right in quashingthe revision order passed under Section 263when the Assessing Officer has passed orderswithout causing any enquiry on the surveyfindings of maintaining two set of books, OPconsultation and Doctor fee not disclosed inthe books of accounts and diversion ofunaccounted income of the firm for constructionof residential house and such survey findingswere admitted by the Managing Partner and theAccountant of the firm in the swon statementrecorded during the survey proceedings?” 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeals are 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 the taxeffect in these cases are less than the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above TaxCase Appeals are dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Lowhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/Tax Effect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open. In the event the tax effect in these cases is above thethreshold limit fixed in the said Circular, liberty isgranted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court torestore the appeals to be heard and decided on merits. Nocosts. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarvaTo1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, "B" Bench.2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward I(4), Tirunelveli.+1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Senior Standing Counsel, SR.No.10239.T.C.A.Nos.374 to 376 of 2017LN(CO)CSR: 08.03.2021