Tca/29/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri K.g.murugesan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.29 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Coimbatore. .... Appellant /Respondent -vs- Shri K.G.Murugesan,54,Thillai Nagar,Erode-638 001 ... Respondent /Appellant Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate TribunalChennai 'D' Bench, dated 25.08.2006 in ITA No.2757/Mds/2006, forthe Assessment year 1997-98, against the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Coimbatore dated05/10/2005, made in Appeal Nos.146, 147, 148 & 149/05-06 andagainst the order of the Income Tax Officer, ward I (2), Erode,Dated 28.03.2005 made in P.A.No.12PM0744/ACWPM6085H. For Appellant:Mrs.Usha Rani for Mr.T.R.Senthil KumarFor Respondent :Mr.R.Senniappan JUDGMENT[Judgement of the Court was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.] This appeal by the appellant/Revenue is directedagainst the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras 'D' Bench, dated 25.08.2006 in ITA No.2757/Mds/2006, forthe Assessment year 1997-98 . https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.Heard Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani for Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learnedCounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.R.Senniappan, learnedCounsel for the Respondent/assessee. 3.This Appeal has been admitted on 25.02.2009, on thefollowing Substantial Questions of Law: "(i)Whether in the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunalwas justified in holding that there was novalid reasons for reopening inspite of the factthat the income escaping assessment admitted bythe assessee was not a justifiable reason formaking the reassessment? (ii)Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxTribunal was right in law in holding thatSec.148noticewasirregularwithoutconsidering Section 292-B of the Income TaxAct? And (iii)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income TaxTribunal was right in not considering thejudgment rendered in Precot Mills wherein itwas held that income escaping assessment forany reason would be sufficient case for makingreassessment?” 4.We have perused the order of Assessment as well as theOrder passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and we find thatthe tax effect in this appeal is lesser than the threshold limitmentioned in Circular No.3 of 2008, dated 11.07.2018, issued bythe Central Board of Direct Taxes, which fixes the monetarylimit as Rs.50,00,000/- for the Department to pursue the matter.Furthermore, the Revenue has not been able to point out anydistinguishing features, by which the Circular No.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, the Appeal isdismissed and the Substantial Questions of Law, framed forconsideration, are 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. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarTo1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras 'D' Bench.2.The Commissioiner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Coimbatore.3.The Income Tax Officer, Ward I(2), Erode.4.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Coimbatore. +1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate Sr.73767 T.C.A.No.29 of 2009br[co]srg 20/11/2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/