The Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Ii, Chennai v. J U D G M E N T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 9.1.2019 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH The Commissioner of Income TaxCentral II, Chennai ... Appellant /AppellantVs.Smt.M.K.Sameera ... Respondent/Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 17.7.2008 made in IT(SS)A No.156/Mds/2007, preferred against the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) II, Chennai in ITA No.1/07-08 dated 17.8.2007 filed against the Assessment Order of theDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle II (3) dated28/02/2007. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar and K.G.Usharani Senior Standing Counsel For respondent : Mr.K.Rathinal J U D G M E N T (Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue callingin question the correctness of the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 17.7.2008 madein IT(SS)A No.156/Mds/2007, by raising the following substantialquestions of law: "(i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case the Income Tax AppellateTribunal was right in law in deleting the additionof Rs.15,70,000/- towards unexplained cash credit,under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 isvalid in law? https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case the Income Tax AppellateTribunal was right in law in deleting the additionof Rs.77,700/- made towards purchase of propertyfrom Sri.K.V.Saleem, even though there was noconsideration the registration charges are to beborne by the assessee?" 2. When the matter is taken up for admission, the learnedStanding Counsel brought to our notice the Circular instructionissued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide CircularNo.3/2018 dated 11.7.2018 wherein it is stipulated that appealsshall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the HighCourt in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.50 lakhs. 3. In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the appeal filedby the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed, keeping open thesubstantial questions of law for determination in an appropriatecase. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar sskTo 1.The Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bench 'B' Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals II) Chennai. 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 11(3), Chennai. +1cc to M/S.T.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate sr.2949+1cc to M/S.N.V.Balaji, Advocate sr.2438 TCA No.508 of 2009 rsi[co]srg 21/02/2019