Salem v. Https://Hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/Hcservices

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 15.6.2020 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA Tax Case Appeal No.219 of 2014 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle I, Coimbatore ... Appellant M/s.Kumbakonam Silver Shop, Salem Vs ... Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the order dated 29.8.2013 made in ITA.No.1361/Mds/2013on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C'Bench for the assessment year 2009-10, against the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, dated 22/03/2013 andmade in ITA No.100/11-12 against the order of the DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-I, Coimbatore dated30.11.2010 and made in PAN/GIR NO. . For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, SCFor Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counselappearing for the appellant – Revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman,learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainst the order dated 29.8.2013 made in ITA.No.1361/Mds/2013on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C'Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year2009-10. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The appeal has been admitted on 09.7.2014 on the followingsubstantial questions of law : “i. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in directingthe Assessing Officer to treat the cashseized to be first given credit as advancetax payment and then recompute the interestunder Section 234 for the assessment year2009-10 ? and 2. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding thatExplanation 2 to Section 132B of the Actintroduced with effect from 01.6.2013 is notclarificatory in nature and it takes effectonly from 1[st]June 2013 and notretrospectively ?” 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. Itis 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. Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench. Chennai. Chennai. 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-I, Coimbatore. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Coimbatore. Coimbatore. TCA.No.219 of 2014 rgn (co) rr ii (08/09/2020)