Tca/322/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. New Ambadi Investments (P) Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 04.06.2019 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.322 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai - III. ...Appellant -vs- ...Appellant M/s.New Ambadi Investments (P) Ltd.,Parry House, 5[th] Floor,43 Moore Street, Chennai – 600 001. ...Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate TribunalChennai 'B' Bench, dated 18.07.2008 in ITA No.437/Mds/2007, forthe Assessment year 2000-01, against the order of Commissionerof Income Tax(Appeals) dated 28/09/2006 and made inI.T.A.No.215/05-06 against the Assessment order dated 15/02/05and made in P.A.NO./G.I.NO. AABCN2115M of Deputy Commissioner ofIncoe Tax, Company Circle IV(4), Chennai for the Assessment year2000-01. For Appellant:Mr.Karthick Ranganathan, V.Rajesh For Respondent :Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar JUDGMENT [Judgement of the Court was made by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.] This Tax Case Appeal by the appellant/Revenue isdirected against the order of the Income Tax Appellate TribunalChennai 'B' Bench, dated 18.07.2008 in ITA No.437/Mds/2007, forthe Assessment year 2000-01. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.Heard Mr.Karthick Ranganatha and Mr.V.Rajesh, learnedcounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar,learned Counsel for respondent/assessee. 3.This Appeal has been admitted on 29.04.2009, on thefollowing Substantial Questions of Law: "(i)Whether,onthefactsandcircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding thatthe Assessing Officer could not make adisallowance under Section 14A in the impugnedassessment without noticing that the proviso toSection 14A applies only to making areassessment under Section 147 of the Act anddoes not apply to cases where the originalreturn was processed under Section 143(1) ofthe Act only and assessment was made for thefirst time under Section 147 of the Act?(ii)Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in not going into the meritsof the appeal by just holding that'reassessment' under Section 147 of the Act wasnot possible in view of the proviso to Section14A of the Act.” 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 2018, 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 pointof time, it is found that the tax effect is above the thresholdlimit. Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Chennai 'B' Bench,Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) XII,121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. 3.Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Company Circle IV(4),Chennai-600 034.Tax Case Appeal No.322 of 2009nr 16/07/2019