Tca/50/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Everwin Export Corporation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR Tax Case (Appeal) No.50 of 2011 Commissioner of Income-tax-III,Coimbatore.... Appellant / Respondent-vs- M/s.Everwin Export Corporation,17/5, Puthu Thottam, Kumarapuram,Tiruppur. (PAN NO. )... Respondent / Appellant Prayer: Tax Case (Appeal) filed under Section 260-A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Judicial Member,Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai, dated17.09.2010, passed in I.T.A.No.666/Mds/2008 for the assessmentyear 2003-04, and aginst the order of the Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeals)-II, Coimbatore, dated 30.01.2018, made in IncomeTax Appeal No.326C/06-07, for the assessment year 2003-2004. This appeal by the appellant/Revenue is directed againstthe order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench,Chennai, dated 17.09.2010, passed in I.T.A.No.666/Mds/2008 forthe assessment year 2003-04. 2.Heard M/s.K.G.Usha Rani, learned Senior Standing Counselfor the appellant/Revenue. 3.This Appeal has been admitted on 23.02.2011, on thefollowing substantial question of law:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961, even though the assesseefiled the revised return ignoring the Long TermCapital Loss which it claimed in the originalreturn, which amounts to furnishing inaccurateparticulars under Section 271(1)(c) 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 Question of Law, framed forconsideration, 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. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// cse Sub Assistant Registrar To 1) The Judicial Member, Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai. 2) The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Coimbatore. +one cc to M/s.T.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate SR No.80758 mr(co)ssm(19/12/18) Tax Case (Appeal) No.50 of 2011