Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 v. Navin Chand Suchanti

ITAT/1/2018IA NO: GA/1/2018(Old No.GA/328/2018)IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)ORIGINAL SIDE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4VERSUSNAVIN CHAND SUCHANTI BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAMAndTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 24[th] November, 2021 Appearance :- Mr. Debasish Chowdhury, Adv. … For AppellantMr. Sanjay Bhowmick, Adv.… For Respondent The Court : This appeal by the revenue filed under Section 260Aof the Income Tax, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against theorder dated 25[th] August, 2017 passed by the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No. 799/Kol/2015 for theassessment year 2009-10. The revenue has raised the followingsubstantial questions of law for consideration :- a)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law,learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata erred in deletingthe addition of deemed dividend in the hand of the assessee asper the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) ?learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata erred in deletingthe addition of deemed dividend in the hand of the assessee asper the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) ? b)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law,learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata erred in holdingthat the advance as advance of salary relying on the judgment ofthe Hon’ble Allahabad High Court whereas in this particularcase the word “advance” means such advance which carrieswith an obligation of repayment ? We have heard Mr. Debasish Chowdhury, learned StandingCounsel appearing for the appellant revenue and Mr. SanjayBhowmick, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent assessee. Itis submitted by the learned Counsel appearing for the respondentassessee that in paragraph 8 of the stay application the tax effect hasbeen mentioned as Rs.20,52,777/-. Therefore, it is submitted that theappeal is hit by the Circular issued by the CBDT and that the samecannot be pursued by the Department on the ground of low tax effect. In view of the submission made by the learned Counsel for therespondent assessee in paragraph 8 of the stay application, thisappeal stands disposed of on the ground of low tax effect.Consequently, the subsequent questions of law are left open. With the disposal of the appeal, the connected application alsostands disposed of. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)