Tca/355/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Dr.a.ramamoorthy

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 22.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.355 of 2013 Commissioner of Income Tax,Tuticorin... Appellant/Respondent-vs-Dr.A.Ramamoorthy,1/143, Thiruchendur Road,Virapandianpatanam,Tuticorin District-628 216.PAN: .. Respondent/Appellant Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961,against the order dated 29.11.2012, on the file of the Income-taxAppellateTribunal'C'Bench,Chennai,inI.T.A.No.1721/Mds/2012 for the assessment year 2007-08 Againstthe order of the Commissioner of Income Tax I,Madurai dated29.03.2012 C NO. 401/03/CIT I/2011-201 in the Assessment Year2007-2008. Against the order of the Deputy Commissioner CircleI,Tuticorin dated 31.12.2009 PAN/GIR NO. in theAssessment Year 2007-2008. For Appellant:Ms.S.Premalatha,Junior Standing Counsel:For Mr.M.Swaminathan,Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent :Mr.N.DevanathanJUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.)This appeal filed by the appellant/Revenue under Section260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is directed against theorder dated 29.11.2012, passed by the Income-tax AppellateTribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1721/Mds/2012 for theassessment year 2007-08. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The above appeal was admitted on the followingsubstantial questions of law, vide order dated 26.08.2013:-“(i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in holding that the order ofthe Assessing Officer is not erroneous andconsequently the order of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax under Section 263 is withoutjurisdiction? (ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in holding that the dividendreceived by the assessee is not covered underSection 56(2)? (iii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in deleting the expenditureto earn the dividend income under Section 14A ofthe Income Tax Act?(iv) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in not holding that theentire transaction of gift to the assessee andsubsequent sale of shares by the assessee was acolourable device adopted by the assessee aslaid down in the Mc Dowell's case reported in154 ITR 148 (Supreme Court)?” 3.Heard Ms.S.Premalatha, learned Junior Standing Counselfor Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for theappellant and Mr.N.Devanathan, learned counsel for therespondent. 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.17/2019,dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.By the said Circular, the monetary limit for filing orpursuing an appeal before the High Court has been increased toRs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that the tax effect inthis case is less than 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 theevent the tax effect is above the threshold limit fixed in the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make amention to this Court to restore the appeal to be heard anddecided on merits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar abrTo To1.The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-I, Tuticorin.2.The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Madurai.3.The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Chennai.+1cc to Mr.Swaminathan, Advocate SR.No. 72339T.C.A.No.355 of 2013A.SK(02/12/2019)