Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Chennai v. Shri.s.giridharan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 21.8.2019 The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.26 of 2017 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chennai...Appellant/ Appellant VsShri.S.Giridharan..Respondent/ Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961againsttheorderdated01.8.2016madeinITA.No.2951/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench for the assessmentyear 2008-09 against the order passed by the Commissionerof Income Tax Appeals II, chennai 34 made inITA.NO.438/2013-2014 dated 16.07.2014 and against the orderpassed by the Deputy commissioner of Income Tax,Companycircle II (1), chennai 34 made in PAN NO. AA GPG 2646 Edated 21.12.2010. For Appellant: Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, SC Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned SeniorStanding Counsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learnedStanding Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the orderdated 01.8.2016 made in ITA.No. 2951/Mds/2014 on the fileof the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench forthe assessment year 2008-09. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The Revenue has filed this appeal by raising thefollowing substantial questions of law :“i. Whether, in the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Tribunalwas correct in treating the receipt asshort term capital gain as against thebusiness income treated under Section28(1)(va) of the Act ? andii. Whether, in the facts andcircumstances of the case, theAppellate Tribunal was correct in nottreating the receipt as non compete feeas held by the Assessing Officer interms of the MoU entered into by theassessee and the transferee company?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenueon account of the low tax effect in terms of CircularNo.17/2019 dated 08.8.2019 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 thetax effect in this case is less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above taxcase appeal is dismissed on account of the low tax effect.The substantial questions of law raised are left open. Inthe event the tax effect is above the threshold limit fixedin the said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue tomake a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to beheard and decided on merits. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/