Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Ii v. Shri.padmasingh Isaac,G

In the High Court of Judicature at MadrasDated : 18.06.2020 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM The Honourable Mrs.Justice PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central II,No.108, Nungambakkam High Road,Chennai-600 034. ...Appellant -vs- Shri.Padmasingh Isaac,G-1174, Rose Residency,15[th] Street, Belly Area,Anna Nagar West, Chennai-600 040.PAN: AID PP 3634L...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 29.05.2015 made in I.T.A.No.1266/Mds/2013 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai forthe assessment year 2008-09 against the order dated 11/03/2013and made in ITA.No.192/11-12 and 107/12-13 on the file of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Chennai preferredagainst the order dated 30/12/2011 and made in PAN.No. on the file of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle II(3), Chennai. For Appellant :Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, SSCMs.K.G.Usha Rani, Standing Counsel For Respondent:Served – No appearanceJudgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J. We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel and Ms.K.G.Usha Rani, learned Standing Counsel appearingfor the appellant-Revenue. 1/3 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated29.05.2015 made in I.T.A.No.1266/Mds/2013 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai for theassessment year 2008-09. 3. The appeal was admitted on 02.12.2015 on the followingsubstantial questions of law:- “1. Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in coming to a conclusionthat the amount received by the assessee isnot in the nature of loan or advances andtherefore deleting the deemed incomechargeable u/s.2(22)(e) of the Income TaxAct? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Appellate Tribunal iscorrect in not considering the second limbof section 2(22)(e) which brings to tax “anypayment by any such company on behalf of orfor the individual benefit, of any suchshareholder, to the extent to which suchcompany in either case possesses accumulatedprofits?3. Whether the Appellate Tribunal wasright in not considering the circuitousroute adopted by the assessee to receive theamount from the company, when the assesseehad not furnished any evidence to disprovethe factual findings of the AssessingOfficer?” 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.17/2019dated 08.8.2019 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 to 2/3 this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided onmerits. -s/d- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar abr To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal'C' Bench Chennai 2.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,Central II, No.108, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai-600 034 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-I Chennai 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle II(3)Chennai. TCA.No.1173 of 2015 aa09/09/2020 3/3