Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax I v. M/S.india Trimmings Pvt. Ltd.,6/636, Pillaippanpalayam,Telungupalayam Post, Annur,Coimbatore-641 653

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.768 of 2017 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax I,No.63, Race Course Road,Coimbatore... Appellant -vs- M/s.India Trimmings Pvt. Ltd.,6/636, Pillaippanpalayam,Telungupalayam Post, Annur,Coimbatore-641 653.PAN: AAA CI 6934 N.. RespondentAppeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961,againsttheorderdated29.04.2016,madeinI.T.A.No.1865/Mds/2011 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2007-08. against the order dated 30.08.2011 passed by theCommissioner of Income Tax (A)-I, Coimbatore as against theorder of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CompanyCircle IV (2), Coimbatore dated 30.12.2010. This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome-tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated29.04.2016, made in I.T.A.No.1865/Mds/2011 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai for the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ assessment year 2007-08. 2.The appeal has been filed raising the following substantialquestions of law:-“(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct inholding that the defect in not passing the draftassessment order u/s.144C(1) of the Act cannot becured at this stage and therefore the final orderpassed by the Assessing Officer is null and voidand without jurisdiction?(ii) Whether the Appellate Tribunal was rightin not considering the fact that the non issue ofdraft assessment order u/s.144C of the Act wasonly a procedural irregularity which can be curedat any stage of the proceedings? and (iii) Whether the Appellate Tribunal was rightin not considering the fact that there is a finedistinction between the orders which are null andvoid and orders which are irregular, wrong orillegal?”3.Heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counselassisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel for theappellant – and Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel forMr.S.Sridhar, learned Counsel 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 (CS-VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar abr https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai. Chennai. +1cc to Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate, S.R.No. 75285 +1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No. 75122 T.C.A.No.768 of 2017 PPA(CO)GN(20/11/2019)