Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 6 v. Mrs.raji Raju

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12.10.2018 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G. RAMESHANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 6,No.121, Nungambakkam High RoadChennai 600 034...Appellant/RespondentVs.Mrs.Raji Raju..Respondent/Appellant Prayer:Tax Case Appeal is filed under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 16.11.2017,made in ITA No.2116/Mds/2017, and against the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Chennai 34, dated23.06.2017 made in I.T.A.No.274/CIT(A)-15/14-15/Assessment Year2009-10, for the Assessment Year 2009-10, and against the orderof the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai-34 dated25.06.2014, made in PAN. , for the Assessment Year2009-10. For respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriram for Mr.S.Sridhar This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue, callingin question the correctness of the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated16.11.2017, made in ITA No.2116/Mds/2017, by raising thefollowing substantial questions of law: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ holding that the payments made for PortfolioManagement Service is allowable as deduction underLong Term Capital/Short Term Capital Gains, whensuch expenditure was not incurred in connection withthe transfer of shares ? and(ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the ITAT was correct in holding, exemptionu/s 80 G was allowable as deduction?" 2. When the matter is taken up for admission, the learnedStanding Counsel brought to our notice the Circular instructionissued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide CircularNo.3/2018 dated 11.7.2018 wherein it is stipulated that appealsshall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the HighCourt in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.50 lakhs. 3. In the instant case, the tax effect is less than themonetary limit imposed and, therefore, this appeal is dismissed,as not pressed, preserving the substantial questions of law fordetermination in an appropriate case. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IV) //True Copy// dixit Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "B" Bench,Chennai. 2. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-6,121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai-34. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)-15,Chennai-34. 4. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai-34. +1 cc to Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, standing counsel for Income Tax, Sr.No.71435 TCA No.565 OF 2018 MR(CO)CSL/10.12.2018