The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-Ii, Chennai v. M/S.vasavi Jyothi Constructions,Chennai-5

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 06.7.2020 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMandThe Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.255 of 2013 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Chennai ...Appellant Vs M/s.Vasavi Jyothi Constructions,Chennai-5....Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 11.5.2012 made in IT(SS)A.No.9/Mds/2011 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench forthe block period from 01.4.1996 to 15.11.2002. Against the order dt.20.12.10 made in ITA.No.6/07-08 on thefile of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Chennai forthe Assessment Block Period 01.4.96 to 15.11.02. Against the order dt.28.2.07 made in GI No/PAN No.24302-V/AACFV 8072H on the file of the Deputy commissioner of IncomeTax, Central Circle 11(4) Chennai for the Assessment BlockPeriod 01.4.96 to 15.11.02. For Appellant: Mr.M.Swaminathan, SSC Mrs.V.Pushpa, SC & Mrs.S.Premalatha, SC For Respondent:Mr.R.Janakiraman Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel, Ms.V.Pushpa, Standing Counsel and Mrs.S.Premalatha,learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenueand Mr.G.Baskar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainst the order dated 11.5.2012 made in IT(SS)A.No.9/Mds/2011on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the block period from01.4.1996 to 15.11.2002. 3. The appeal has been admitted on 26.7.2013 on the followingsubstantial questions of law : “i. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in deleting the additionmade by the Assessing Officer towards loanamounting to Rs.31.50 lakhs when theassessee himself has admitted it as loan ?And (ii) Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in granting relief of Rs.27,82,600/-towards interest while arriving at theprofit from MTH Road project when theassessee has not proved that the loan wasspecifically incurred for his project ?” 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.17/2019dated 08.8.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. Bythe said Circular, the monetary limit for filing or pursuing anappeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore.It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is lessthan 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 the eventthe tax effect is above the threshold limit fixed in the saidcircular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention tothis Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided onmerits. No costs. To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Chennai 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle 11(4),Chennai.rsv(co)krd 3/9 TCA.No.255 of 2013