Tca/152/2019 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri.a.lalichan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARANANDTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VELMURUGANT.C.A. No. 152 of 2019&C.M.P. No. 4018 of 2019 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 6,No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Chennai. ... Appellant Shri A. Lalichan ... Respondent Prayer:Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras'B' Bench dated 12.07.2018 in ITA No. 1879/Chny/2016, as against the Order passed by the Commissioner of IncomeTax in order dated 18/03/2016 for the Assessment Year (2009-2010)(2010-11) and (2011 -12) and as against the reassessment orderdated 26/03/2014 for the Assessment Years (2009-10)(2010-11) and(2011-2012) by the Income Tax Officer, Chennai. (Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.KIRUBAKARAN,J.) This Tax Case Appeal has been preferred by the Revenueagainsttheorderdated12.07.2018passedinITA.No.1881/Chny/2016 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'B' Bench for the assessment year 2009-2010.2.A survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act,1961wasconductedinthebusinesspremisesoftherespondent/assessee by the Investigation Wing, Unit-III, Chennai https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ on 05.06.2012. The assessee had not filed the return of incomefor the assessment year 2009-2010. Hence, notice under Section148 of the said Act was issued. In response to this notice, theassessee filed return of income on 04.04.2013 admitting totalincome of Rs.89,300/-. Notice under Section 142(1) of the saidAct was issued calling for various details. Thereafter, onperusal of return and details furnished, the assessment wascompleted under Section 143(3) r/w Section 147 of the said Acton 26.03.2014 assessing an income of Rs.2,26,99,300/- Aggrievedby the said order made by the Assessing Officer, the assesseepreferred an appeal before The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) which came to be dismissed by order dated 18.03.2016.Questioning the same, the assessee preferred an appeal beforethe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench in ITA No.1879 of 2016 which was partly allowed by the impugned order.Against the order of the Appellate Tribunal only, the presentappeal has been filed by the Revenue. 3.The appeal is admitted on the following substantialquestions of law : “1.Whether the ITAT is correct in law inadopting Rs.9,32,80,000/- as the cost of acquisitionof land at Kerala by virtue of the agreement dated24.01.2007 when the assessee in its computation ofcapital gains has claimed Rs.4,49,33,080/- only as thetotal cost of land in the computation statement filedon 02.07.2012 during the post survey proceedings? 2.Whether the ITAT is correct in adoptingRs.9,32,80,000/- as the cost of acquisition of theland when in fact the assessee has not submit anyevidence of payments in excess of Rs.4,49,33,080/-towards the purchase of land and the initial burden isnot discharged by the assessee? 3.Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct inholding that the Revenue has accepted the agreementdated 24.01.2007 as genuine and undisputed documentwhen in fact, the learned CIT(A) in his order hasquestioned the genuineness of the documentary proof asit is not placed before any notary and no revenuestamp affixed? 4.Mr.J. Narayanasamy, learned Senior Standing Counselappearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the taxeffect in this case is less than Rs.1 crore and is covered byCircular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Director,Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministryof Finance, Government of India, Delhi. As per the saidcircular, the monetary limit to file an appeal before the High Court is fixed at Rs.1 crore. In this case, tax effect is lessthan Rs.1 crore and therefore, the case has to be dismissed. 4.Mr.J. Narayanasamy, learned Senior Standing Counselappearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the taxeffect in this case is less than Rs.1 crore and is covered byCircular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Director,Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministryof Finance, Government of India, Delhi. As per the saidcircular, the monetary limit to file an appeal before the High Court is fixed at Rs.1 crore. In this case, tax effect is lessthan Rs.1 crore and therefore, the case has to be dismissed. 5.This Court perused the circular dated 08.08.2019 andParagraph No.2 of the said Circular, which prescribes monetarylimit for filing appeal is usefully extracted as follows: 2.As a step towards further management of litigation,it has been decided by the Board that monetary limitsfor filing of appeals in income-tax cases be enhancedfurther through amendment in Para 3 of the Circularmentioned above and accordingly, the table formonetary limits specified in Para 3 of the Circularshall read as follows: 6.In view of the submissions made by the learned SeniorStanding counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and alsoin view of the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued bythe Director, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Delhi, the Tax CaseAppeal is dismissed on account of tax effect. However, thesubstantial questions of law framed are left open. In the eventthe tax effect is above the limit fixed in the said circular,liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention to thisCourt to restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits.No costs. Connected C.M.P. is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench. Madras 'B' Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Nungambakkam, Chenani. Nungambakkam, Chenani. 3.The Income Tax Officer, Ward IV(1), Chennai-34. Ward IV(1), Chennai-34. +1cc to Mr.G.Baskar, Advocate SR.102749 T.C.A. No. 152 of 2019 srg 10/02/2020