The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-I, Chennai v. Shri.vinod Kumar M.jain

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 20.8.2019 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMANDTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN TAX CASE APPEAL NO.903 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-I, Chennai...Appellant/Respondent Vs Shri.Vinod Kumar M.Jain ...Respondent/Appellant APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 26.3.2010 made in ITA.No.16/Mds/2010 on the fileof the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for theassessment year 2007-08. against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-I, Chennai-34, made in ITA.No.362/08-09, dated 05.11.2009against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income TaxCentral Range IV(1) Chennai-34 made in PAN/GIR/ , dated29.12.2008.For Appellant: Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, SC Respondent : served and no appearance Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel, assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counselappearing for the appellant – Revenue. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated26.3.2010 made in ITA.No. 16/Mds/2010 on the file of the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessmentyear 2007-08. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The appeal was admitted on 04.10.2010 on the followingsubstantial questions of law : “i. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in deleting the addition on account ofthe value of excess stock by wrongly givingreduction of 15% for stone and beads and bynot taking the prevailing market value asper the provisions of the Act ? and ii. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Tribunal wasright in deleting the addition on account ofthe value of gold plates seized from ShriKumarapal Kanthilal Jain at the airport,which was owned by the assessee withoutconsidering the weight of evidence and thediscrepancies in the statements of theconcerned persons and relying on irrelevantmaterial ?” 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. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// RS Sub Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench.Chennai 'B' Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-I,Chennai-34.Chennai-34. 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Range IV(1),Chennai-34.Central Range IV(1),Chennai-34. +1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate in sr.no.70997 TCA.No.903 of 2010 NMI(CO)CS/10/10/2019