Income Tax, Chennai v. Shri.d.napoleon

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 17.9.2018 Coram : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMAND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal Nos.1050 and 1051 of 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai Income Tax, Chennai ...AppellantVsShri.D.Napoleon...Respondent APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the common order dated 08.1.2010 in ITA Nos.1577 and1578/Mds/09 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate TribunalMadras 'B' Bench respectively for the assessment years 2005-06and 2006-07 appeal against the order of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax(A)VI 121,M.G. Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34 order inI.T.A. No. 227/2008-2009 and I.T.A. No. 226/2008-2009 againstthe Assessment Order for the assessment year 2006-2007 and 2005-2006 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax I(II), Media CircleI,Chennai PAN No. dated 23.12.2008. For Appellant : Ms.S.PremalathaFor Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. 2. The Revenue has preferred these appeals challenging theorders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal inITA.Nos.1577 and 1578/ Mds/09 for the assessment years 2005-06and 2006-07 respectively. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 06, found in the name of the assessee,cannot be treated as unexplained credits onthe ground that they relate to loans fromthe earlier years, when there is a cleardeclaration in the 44AD report by theassessee that these were fresh credits ?” 4. TCA.No.1051 of 2010 has also been admitted on 11.1.2011on the following substantial question of law : “Whether,onthefactsandcircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in holding that credits ofRs.12,97,188/- for the assessment year 2006-07, found in the name of the assessee,cannot be treated as unexplained credits ?” 5. It may not be necessary for us to answer the abovesubstantial questions of law, as the monetary limits in theseappeals are lesser than the amount fixed by the circularinstructions issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. ThisCourt had an occasion to consider the effect of those circularsin TCA.No.395 of 2018 dated 24.7.2018, the relevant portions ofwhich are as follows : “4. Further, it is relevant to notethat by Circular No.3/2018, dated 11.7.2018,monetary limit has further been increasedand appeals be maintainable before the HighCourts. It has been increased toRs.50,00,000/-. Hence, viewed from anyangle, this appeal could not have beenfiled.5. Thus, by applying the above Circularissued by the CBDT, this appeal ought not tohave been filed by the Revenue and hence,for that reason, this tax case appeal isdismissed and the substantial questions oflaw, framed for consideration, are leftopen.” 6. In the light of the above, the above appeals aredismissed. No costs. The substantial questions of law are leftopen for consideration. s/d- Assistant Registrar(CO) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench. Sastri Bhavan, Chennai, Sastri Bhavan, Chennai, 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax(A)VI 121,M.G. Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34 121,M.G. Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Media Circle I, Chennai. Media Circle I, Chennai. +1 CC to Mr.M. Swaminathan, Advocate sr 64806. TCA.Nos.1050 and 1051 of 2010 KS(CO)SP(03/10/2018)