The Commissioner Of Income Tax Chennai v. G.jasoda

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.HULUVADI G.RAMESH, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICEANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Tax Case Appeal No.464 of 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai...Appellant/RespondentVs.G.Jasoda..Respondent/Appellant-----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 07.10.2016 in ITANo.1225/Mds/2016 against the order of the Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeals) 5, Chennai 34 dated 15/3/2016 in ITA.No.II/CIT(A)-5/14-15 against the order of the Income Tax Officer, Businessward-X-(4) i/c, Chennai 6, dated 18/3/14 made inPAN.No.AAKPG6965E Assessment year 2011-12. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravi Kumar Senior Standing Counsel (Income Tax) Asst. by Mrs.R.HemalathaJ U D G M E N T(Delivered by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue callingin question the correctness of the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated07.10.2016 in ITA No.1225/Mds/2016, by raising the followingsubstantial questions of law: "(i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right indeleting the addition of Rs.69,91,866/- made onaccount of unexplained difference in stock ofsilver, especially when the assessee had furnished https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ reconciliation statement admitting that there was adifference of 7.634 kgs of silver? (ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right indeleting the addition made by the AO as unaccountedinvestment for cash seized by the Revenueauthorities amounting Rs.2,66,000/- in spite ofthe fact that the Assessee had in the statementgiven was not in a position to substantiate the samewith the cogent evidence? (iii) Whether the finding of the Tribunal isproper by deleting the difference in inventoryamounting to Rs.256,096/- made on account ofarithmetical calculation? and (iv) Whether the reasoning and finding of theTribunal is proper by holding that stockreconciliation statement furnished by the Assesseewas correct especially when the return of income forthe assessment year which was filed on 25.3.2011after conducting of survey under Section 133A on18.3.2011 had adopted higher quantity and value ofthe closing stock and without any evidencesupporting for the same?" 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellantproduced a Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.7.2018. The crux of thecircular is that the Department shall not file tax appeals ifthe monetary limit is within fifty lakhs. Since the subjectmatter of the appeal does not satisfy the norms, the learnedcounsel fairly concedes that the appeal need not be entertained. 3. In view of the above, this appeal is dismissed. However,the substantial questions of law raised in this appeal stillsurvives for the Department to raise in appropriate case. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VII) kpl //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras B Bench Madras B Bench 2.The Income Tax Officer, Business Ward X(4), I/c III Floor, Kannammai Building, 611, Annasalai Chennai 6 Business Ward X(4), I/c III Floor, Kannammai Building, 611, Annasalai Chennai 6 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-5 Room No.214, II Floor, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34. Room No.214, II Floor, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34. +2cc to MR.T.Ravikumar, Advocate SR.No.56261, 55171 PVS(CO)sm:17.9.2018T.C.A.No.464 of 2018.