Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 2 v. Shri.r.sivalingam,61/1B, Pavithra Apartment,Kumalan Kuttai,Collectorate Post, Erode-638 011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2,No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore. .. Appellant -vs- Shri.R.Sivalingam,61/1B, Pavithra Apartment,Kumalan Kuttai,Collectorate Post, Erode-638 011.PAN: APA PS 0181 H.. Respondent Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961,againsttheorderdated20.12.2016,madeinI.T.A.No.347/Mds/2016, C.O.No.46/Mds/2016 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for theassessment year 2012-13, against the order dated 23/11/2015,made in ITA.No.598/2014-15 on the file of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax(Appeals)-3, Coimbatore and against the order dated27/03/2015 on the file of the Income Tax Officer Ward-1(4),Erode, made in PAN.No. for the Assessment year 2012-13. For Appellant:Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar,Senior Standing Counsel:assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani,Standing Counsel For Respondent :Mr.N.V.BalajiJUDGMENT(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome-tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated20.12.2016, made in I.T.A.No.347/Mds/2016 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for theassessment year 2012-13. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The appeal has been admitted on 16.08.2017, on thefollowing substantial questions of law:-“(i) Whether the learned Appellate Tribunal wasright in law in deleting the addition made underSection 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when theassessment was made based on the diary impoundedduring the course of survey action under Section133A of the Act and also on the basis of thestatements recorded from the assessee, which wasneither retracted nor raised any dispute on theentries made therein? and(ii) Whether the learned Tribunal was right inlaw in declining to interfere with the order ofthe Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) whereinthe addition was restricted to 8% of the cashcredits found, without appreciating the fact thatcash credits are to be charged to tax as incomeunder Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, inthe absence of any explanation as to the natureand sources of the cash credits by the assessee?”3.Heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counselassisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel for theappellant. 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue onaccount of the low tax effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019,dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. Bythe said Circular, the monetary limit for filing or pursuing anappeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore.It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is lessthan the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above tax caseappeal is dismissed on account of the low tax effect. Thesubstantial questions of law framed are left open. In the eventthe tax effect is above the threshold limit fixed in the saidcircular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention tothis Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided onmerits. No costs.Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3,Coimbatore. 3.The Income Tax Officer,Ward-I(4), Erode – 638 001. +1cc to M/s.T.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate SR.No.75127 +1cc to M/s.N.V.Balaji, Advocate SR.No.76082AKM/13.11.19/3P-6C/ T.C.A.No.457 of 2017