Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Central 2 v. Shri P.navaneethakrishnan Huf

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 12.10.2018 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G. RAMESHANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM Tax Case Appeal No.602 of 2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central 2, No.108, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Chennai. ... ...Appellant /Appellant Vs. Shri P.Navaneethakrishnan HUF ...Respondent/Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, SMC 'A' Bench, Chennai, dated 09.02.2018, made inM.P.No.320/Chny/2017 in ITA No.3148/Mds/2016. Against the Orderof the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal SMC 'A' Bench, Chennaidated 24.07.2017, made in PAN.No. , against the Orderof the commissioner of Income Tax (Apppeals) – 2 Madurai, dated04.03.2016, made in ITA.No. 161/2014-15 against the Order of theIncome Tax Officer Ward – II (2), Bibikulam, Madurai – 625 002,dated 21.03.2014, made in under section 143 (3) r/w section 147of IT Act, for the Assessment Year 2008-09, and against theOrder of the Income Tax Officer, Ward II (2), Madurai – 625 002dated 31.12.2010, made in under section 143 (3) for theAssessment Year 2008-09. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Standing Counsel JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by Huluvadi G.Ramesh,J) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue, callingin question the correctness of the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, 'SMC' 'A' Bench, Chennai, dated09.02.2018,madeinM.P.No.320/Chny/2017inI.T.A.No.3148/Mds/2016, by raising the following substantialquestions of law: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ "(i) Whether the ITAT is correct in law inholding that cess cannot be treated as tax andtherefore deciding the appeal as not maintainablewithout appreciating the fact that the appeal beforethe ITAT is in accordance with the CBDT Board'sCircular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 ? (ii) On the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, whether the ITAT is correct in law inholding that the appeal is not maintainable withoutadjudicating the merits of the case though theappeal before the ITAT is in accordance with theCBDT's Circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 ? and (iii) On the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, whether the observations contained in thepresent order are not contradictory to the decisionarrived at by the same bench in the order of theHon'ble ITAT in ITA No.1201 & 1202/Mds/2017, dated28.12.2017, delivered in the case of M/s.ChettinadCement Corporation Ltd., Chennai ?" 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 thatappeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before theHigh Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.50lakhs. 3. In the instant case, the tax effect is less than themonetary limit imposed and, therefore, this appeal is dismissedas not pressed, preserving the substantial questions of law fordetermination in an appropriate case. Sd/-Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// dixit Sub Assistant Registrar TO 1. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central 2, No. 108, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai. 2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC 'A' Bench, Chennai. SMC 'A' Bench, Chennai. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) – 2, Madurai. (Appeals) – 2, Madurai. 4. The Income Tax Officer, Ward II (2), Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. Ward II (2), Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. BR(CO)GN(04/12/2018) TCA No.602 of 2018