Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Central I v. M/S.deccan Estates & Constructions Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.370 of 2017 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central I,No.108, Nungambakkam High Road,Chennai-600 034... Appellant -vs- M/s.Deccan Estates & Constructions Ltd.,24/46, Dr.B.N.Road,T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017.PAN: AAA CD 2068 C.. Respondent Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961,againsttheorderdated15.12.2016,madeinI.T.A.No.227/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2008-09,against the Order dated 20.11.2015 made in ITA No.235/14-15 onthe file of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennaifor the Assessment year 2008-09 and against the Order dated30.04.2014 made in PAN No. on the file of the DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-III(4), Chennai forthe Assessment year 2008-09 against the order dated 21.12.2010made in PAN/GIR No. on the file of the AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle III(4), Chennai forthe Assessment year 2008-2009. For Appellant:Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar,Senior Standing Counsel:assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani,Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.R.Venkatanarayana, For M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan & Ramamani****** JUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome-tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated15.12.2016, made in I.T.A.No.227/Mds/2016 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for theassessment year 2008-09. 2.The appeal has been filed raising the following substantialquestions of law:- “(i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the ITAT is correct in law in coming tothe conclusion that penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) is notattracted to the facts of the case? and (ii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the ITAT is correct in law in statingthat the claim of 'bad debts' of Rs.50 lakhs madeby the assessee is bonafide mistake, whereas theAppellate Tribunal in the quantum appeal statedthat this amount cannot be treated as “bad debt”as the same has never been part of computation ofincome/loss of the business of the assessee inearlier assessment years?” 3.Heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counselassisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel for theappellant – and Mr.R.Venkatanarayana, learned counsel, forM/s.Subbaraya Aiyar, Padmanabhan & Ramamani, for the respondent. 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.17/2019,dated 08.08.2019 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 tothis Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided onmerits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Insp.Cell) //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarabrTo1)The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai.2)The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai 3)The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-III(4), Chennai4)The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle III(4), Chennai +1 cc to Mr.M.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate, S.R.No.75129+1 cc to Mr.Subbaraya Aiyar, Advocate, S.R.No.75139T.C.A.No.370 of 2017MR(CO)SSM(04/11/2019)