The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M.karthikeyan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19.12.2018 CORAMTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH Tax Case Appeal Nos.687 & 688 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai. ... Respondent/ Appellant in both appealsVs.M.Karthikeyan ... Appellant/ Respondent in TCA No.687/2009 Smt.K.Suyambukani ... Appellant/Respondent in TCA No.688/2009 Tax Case Appeal No.687 of 2009 is filed under Section 260-Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, dated 20.04.2007, made inIT (SS) A.No.95/Mds/2002. against the order dated 22/2/2002 in ITA No.172/2001-02 bythe Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, Chennai and against theorder dated 21/3/2005 in ITA No.73/2004-2005, by theCommissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. Tax Case Appeal No.688 of 2009 is filed under Section 260-Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, dated 20.04.2007, made inIT (SS) A.No.96/Mds/2002, against the order of AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax, Circle-XII, Chennai dated 31/03/2004Assessment Year 1999-2000 and order of Commissioner of IncomeTax Appeals, Chennai dated 22/02/2002 in ITA No.169/2001-2002. For appellant in both appeals: Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel. For respondent in both appeals : Mr.S.Sridhar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ J U D G M E N T (Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J.) These Tax Case Appeals have been filed by the Revenue,calling in question the correctness of the order passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, dated20.04.2007, in IT (SS) A.No.95/Mds/2002 and IT (SS)A.No.96/Mds/2002 respectively, by raising the followingsubstantial questions of law : "(i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income Tax AppellateTribunal is right in law in not considering theadditions made on account of unexplained investmentin properties in the case of the assessee ? (ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income Tax AppellateTribunal is right in law in not considering theunexplained investments made on account of jewelleryfound in the premises of her/his daughter whichcould not be accounted for by her/him ? 2. When the matters are taken up for hearing, learnedStanding Counsel for the Department brought to our notice theCircular instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxesvide Circular No.3/2018, dated 11.7.2018, wherein, it isstipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by theDepartment before the High Court in cases where the tax effectdoes not exceed Rs.50.00 lakhs. 3. In the instant cases, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and, therefore, the appealsfiled by the Revenue are dismissed, as not pressed, keeping openthe substantial questions of law for determination inappropriate cases. No costs. //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar dixitTo 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Chennai 'B' Bench,Chennai. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax I,121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Chennai-34. 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Circle-XII, Chennai. +1cc to M/S.T.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate Sr.88713+1cc to Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate Sr.88847 TCA Nos.687 & 688 OF 2009 sj[co]srg 25/01/2019