Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 2 v. M/S.h.m.brothers Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21.07.2020 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2,No.121, Mahathma Gandhi Road,Chennai 34 ...Appellant vs. M/s.H.M.Brothers Ltd.,13, Errabulla Street,Chennai ...Respondent Prayer ::- Appeal filed against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras D Bench, dated 29.04.2016 in ITANo.331/Mds/2014, against the Order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals)-II, Chennai in ITA No.482/2013-14 dated 28/10/2013against the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of IncomeTax, Company Circle-II(2) Chennai dated 30/08/2011 in PANNo.AAACH2180B against the Assessment Order for the AssessmentYear 1996-97 dated 05/03/2001 in PAN/GIR No.47-089-CX25410passed by the Joint Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Special RangeIX, Chennai-34. For appellant: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, Senior Standing Counsel For respondent : No appearance JUDGMENT(Made by DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J.) The Court was held by Video Conference, as per theResolution of the Full Court dated 3 July 2020, by Judges attheir respective residence and the counsel, staff of the Courtappearing from their respective residences. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue,calling in question the correctness of the order passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras D Bench, in ITA No.331/Mds/2014, dated 29.04.2016, byraising the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether on the facts andcircumstances of the case and in law, theTribunal was correct and justified incancelling the penalty levied u/ s 271(I)(c)? 2. Whether on the facts andcircumstances of the case and in law, theTribunal was right and justified in holdingthat AO exceeded his jurisdiction ininitiating the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) when the original assessment orderwas set-aside by CIT(A) and in theconsequential order passes u/s 143(3) r.w.s250, the AO rightly initiated the penalty onsatisfaction of concealment of income duringsuch proceedings ? 3. Whether on the facts andcircumstances of the case and in law, theTribunal erred in holding that AO cannotinitiate penalty in the reassessmentproceedings especially when the originalassessment order does not exist as it wasset-aside by CIT(A)directing the AO to passfresh speaking order and whether suchfinding by Tribunal is perverse both in theeyes of law and facts? 4. Whether on the facts andcircumstances of the case and in law, theTribunal was right and justified in deletingthe penalty levied on bogus depreciationclaim when assessee failed to substantiatethe claim by producing at least the invoiceevidencing purchase of such asset? 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learnedStanding Counsel brought to our notice, the Circular instructionissued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide CircularNo.17/2019 dated 8th August 2019, wherein, it is stipulated thatappeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before theHigh Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceedRs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). 3. In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the Appeal filedby the Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open thesubstantial questions of law for determination in appropriatecases. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarTo1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Madras.2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Chennai.3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle -II(2), Chennai.4.The Joint Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Special Range-IX Chennai-34.5.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. 3. In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the Appeal filedby the Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open thesubstantial questions of law for determination in appropriatecases. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarTo1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Madras.2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Chennai.3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle -II(2), Chennai.4.The Joint Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Special Range-IX Chennai-34.5.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. TCA No.358 of 2017 ss[co]srg 24/09/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/