Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 3 v. M/S.venkatalakshmi Textiles Pvt. Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25.9.2020 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.562 and 563 of 2017 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 3,No.63, Race Course Road,Coimbatore. Appellant/Appellant Vs. M/s.Venkatalakshmi Textiles Pvt. Ltd.,335, Mangalam Road,Tirupur 641 604. PAN: AAA CV 7208 A Respondent/Respondent Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 9.11.2016 made in ITANo.1467/Mds/2016 and C.O.No.113/Mds/2016. Preferred against theorder dated 31.12.2015 in ITA No.128/2014-15 on the filing theoffice of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Coimbatorefiled against the reassessement order dated 31.03.2014 for theAssessment year 2006-2007 on the filing the office of the DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle, Tiruppur. Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Ms.Indumathi for Mr.J.Balachander COMMON JUDGMENT These Tax Case Appeals have been filed by the Revenue,calling in question the correctness of the order passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated9.11.2016 made in ITA No.1467/Mds/2016 and C.O.No.113/Mds/2016,for the Assessment Year 2006-2007, by raising the followingsubstantial questions of law: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal is Justified in law inholding that the reopening of the assessment was badin law when the assessee had failed to disclosefully and truly all the material facts necessary forassessment in the Return of income filed by it?(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal is Justified in law inholding that the reopening of the assessment was badin law when the A.O had reason to believe thatincome had escaped assessment?(iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal is justified in law inholding that there was ‘change of opinion’ by theA.O., when the A.O. reopened the assessment to giveeffect to a new finding which was not available tothe A.O at the time of completion of originalassessment? (iv) Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal is justified in law inallowing the Cross Objection filed by the assesseeupholding that the reopening of assessment is bad inlaw?" 2. When the matters are taken up for hearing, learnedSenior Standing Counsel brought to our notice the Circularinstruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes videCircular No.17/2019 dated 8th August 2019, wherein, it isstipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by theDepartment before the High Court in cases where the tax effectdoes not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). 3. In the instant cases, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the Appeals filedby the Revenue are dismissed, as withdrawn, keeping open thesubstantial questions of law for determination in appropriatecases. No costs. To Assistant Registrar//True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar 1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tirupur. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals-3), Coimbatore. +1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate in SR.NO..31628 +1cc to Mr.J.Balachander, Advocate in SR.NO..31587 T.C.(A) Nos.562 & 563/2017 BR(CO)RV(04/11/2020)