The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. Citi Financial Retail Services (India) Ltd., Chennai-4

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 30.8.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.312 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai...Appellant/AppellantVsCiti Financial Retail Services (India) Ltd., Chennai-4....Respondent/RespondentAPPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 18.9.2008 made in ITA.No.420/Mds/2008 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench forthe assessment year 1996-97, against the order dated 24/4/06made in ITA No:192/2006-07/A-III on the file of the Commissionerof Income Tax(Appeals)-III, Chennai for the Assessment Year1996-97, against the order dated 20-3-2002 made in PAN/GIRNO: on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of IncomeTax Company Circle I(3) Chennai for the assessment year 1996-97. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, SSC For Respondent : Mr.V.S.Jayakumar Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,JWe have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learnedSenior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenueand Mr.V.S. Jayakumar, learned counsel appearing for therespondent – assessee. 1 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated18.9.2008 made in ITA.No. 420/Mds/2008 on the file of the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench for the assessmentyear 1996-97. 3. The appeal was admitted on 28.4.2009 on the followingsubstantial question of law :“Whether, in the facts and circumstancesof the case, the Tribunal was right indeleting the penalty under Section 271(1)(c)when the assessee had furnished inaccurateparticulars of its income by claiming 100%depreciation on wind energy generator, whichis not allowable by law ?” 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 question of law framed is 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(CS-III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar RS To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench. Chennai 'D' Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. Chennai. 2 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals-III, Chennai-34. Appeals-III, Chennai-34. 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle I(3), Chennai. Company Circle I(3), Chennai. 5.The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Company Circle I(3), Chennai. Company Circle I(3), Chennai. +1cc to Mr.V.S.Jayakumar, Advocate SR.75720 +1cc to Mr.T.Ravikumar, Advocate SR.75204 TCA.No.312 of 2009VBA(CO)CB(14/11/2019) 3