The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Ii, Chennai v. Shri.sayarchand Nahar, Chennai-18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 21.8.2019 The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central II, Chennai...Appellant Vs. Shri.Sayarchand Nahar, Chennai-18....Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 16.2.2012 made in ITA.No.2140/Mds/2010 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench forthe assessment year 2006-07, against the order dated 20/09/2010and made in ITA.Nos.230/07-08, on the file of the Commissionerof Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Chennai for the assessment year2006-07 and against the order dated 31/12/2007, passed undersection 153A read with section 143(3) of the I.T. Act 1961 onthe file of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CentralCircle II(1), Chennai.For Appellant:Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, SCFor Respondent:Mr.J.Naresh Kumar We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counselappearing for the appellant – Revenue and Mr.J.Naresh Kumar,learned counsel appearing for the respondent – assessee. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated16.2.2012 made in ITA.No. 2140/Mds/2010 on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench for theassessment year 2006-07. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The appeal was admitted on 19.7.2012 on the followingsubstantial questions of law :“i. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in holding that the urbanland sold by the assessee falls within themeaning of capital asset as per Section 2(14)(iii)(b) of the Income Tax Act duringthe relevant period 2005-06 ? ii. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in dismissing theDepartment's appeal without adjudicatingground No.1e viz. The learned CIT(A) hasfailed to note that the land in question waspurchased at a cost of Rs.1,78,542/- in1989,thetransferpricewasRs.1,16,57,500/- during the financial year2005-06 and that the adjoining property wasalso brought from his mother and developedinto plots, which fact indicates that theland in question was not an agriculturalland during the relevant previous year,raised by the Department before theTribunal ?iii. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in holding that the landis an agricultural land when the said landwas developed along with the adjacent landsinto plots, which fact indicates that theland in question is not an agricultural landduring the relevant previous year ? Andiv. Whether the Appellate Tribunal isright in observing that the assessee hadshown agricultural income in its income taxreturns when no such income is declared bythe assessee in the return of incomerelevant to the assessment year 2006-07?” 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. Sd/- 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. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench.2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II,Chennai.3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II(1), Chennai. +1 cc to Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar,Advocate Sr.No. 71737+1 cc to Mr.J.Naresh Kumar, Advocate, Sr.No.71118AKM/30.10.19/3P-6C / TCA.No.204 of 2012 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/