Tca/107/2009 Of Director Of Income Tax v. Sea Horse Trust

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR Tax Case (Appeal) No.107 of 2009 Director of Income Tax, (Exemptions)-1,Chennai.... Appellant/Appellant -vs-Sea Horse Trust,18, Swami Sivananda Salai,Chepauk, Chennai-5.... Respondent/Respondent Tax Case (Appeal) filed under Section 260-A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income-tax AppellateTribunal“C”Bench,Chennai,dated15.02.2008inI.T.A.No.514/Mds/2007 for the assessment year 2002-03. againstthe order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -XI,Chennai, dated 19/10/06 and made in ITA No.7/05-06 against theAssessment order, of the Assistant Director of Income Tax,(Exemptions) I, Chennai dated 10/02/2005 in PAN*/GIR No.1949-5for the assessment year 2002-2003. (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal, by the appellant/Revenue, is directedagainst the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal “C”Bench, Chennai, dated 15.02.2008, in I.T.A.No.514/Mds/2007 forthe assessment year 2002-03. 2.Heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Standing Counselfor the Revenue; and M/s.Harshini Jhothi Raman, learned counselfor the assessee.3.This Appeal has been admitted on 12.03.2009, on thefollowing substantial question of law:- “Whether, in the facts and circumstances of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the case, the Tribunal was right in holding thatassessee had clearly stated the purpose for whichthe funds had been accumulated and accordinglyeligible for accumulation and carry forward ofincome as per Section 11(2) when assessee had notneither given particulars regarding the stepstaken towards fulfillment of the objects of thetrust nor given the break up of proposedexpenditure while opting for accumulation ofincome?” 4.We have perused the order of assessment as well as theorder passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XI andwe find that the tax effect in this appeal is lesser than thethreshold limit mentioned in Circular No.3 of 2018, dated11.07.2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, whichfixes the monetary limit as Rs.50,00,000/- for the Department topursue the matter. Furthermore, the Revenue has not been ableto point out any distinguishing features, by which the CircularNo.3 of 2018, dated 11.07.2018, cannot be applied. 5.Thus, for the above reasons, the Revenue cannot pursuethis appeal in view of the low tax effect. Hence, this Tax CaseAppeal is dismissed and the substantial question of law, framedfor consideration, is left open. No costs. The Revenue is atliberty to seek for restoration of appeal if at a later point oftime, it is found that the tax effect is above the thresholdlimit or to fall under the exceptional clauses mentioned in theCircular. abrTo https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/