The Commissioner Of Income Tax Chennai v. Justice T.s.arunachalam New

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24.09.2018 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G. RAMESHANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM Tax Case Appeal No.712 of 2018 The Commissioner of Income TaxChennai. .. AppellantVs. Justice T.S.ArunachalamNew No.56/1, Veerabadran streetNungambakkamChennai-600 034.PAN: .. Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai, dated 30.01.2018 in ITANo.2455/Mds/2017. Against the order of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals)-4, in ITA No.180/16-17/A.Y 2014-15 dated21/07/2017 and arising out of the assessment of the AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax-Non Corporate Circle-3 Chennai in PANNo.AAHPA8574C dated 29/12/2016. For Appellant : Ms.HemalathaStanding Counsel J U D G M E N T (Delivered by Huluvadi G.Ramesh,J) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue callingin question the correctness of the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai, dated30.01.2018 in ITA No.2455/Mds/2017, by raising the followingsubstantial questions of law: "(i) Whether the Tribunal was right in allowingdeduction under Section 54 of the I.T.Act even onthe balance amount of sale consideration which wasneither utilized for reinvestment in property nor https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ put into a capital gain account scheme as prescribedunder Section 54(2) holding that it was only a smalltechnical breach which should not disentitled theAssessee for the benefit of deduction under Section54 of the Income Tax Act? (ii) Whether the disallowance under Section 54(2) of the Act cannot be made for not depositing thebalance sale proceeds into a capital gains schemeaccount within the stipulated period under Section139(1) and would not disentitle the Assessee fromclaiming the benefit even in cases wherein thecondition imposed by the statute had not compliedwith? 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 11.07.2018 wherein it is stipulated that appealshall 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 less than themonetary limit imposed and therefore, the appeal is dismissed asnot pressed, preserving the substantial questions of law fordetermination in an appropriate case. No costs. Sd/-Assistant Registrar(CS-II) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar kj To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A'Bench, Chennai. 2. The Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)4, Room No.229, 2[nd] Floor, Main Building, Income Tax Office, 121,Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-34. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle-3, Chennai. 4. The Assistant Registry Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,III Floor, Rajaji Bhavan, III Floor, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai-90. +1cc to Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No. 66004 Tax Case Appeal No.712 of 2018 RSV(CO)CSL/17.10.2018