The Commissioner Of Income Tax Chennai v. M/S. Palanquin Investments Pvt Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDated: 28/6/2016 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMARANDTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR Tax Case Appeal No.335 of 2013 The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai....Appellant/RespondentVs M/s. Palanquin Investments Pvt LtdNo.12 Third Main RoadKasturba NagarAdyarChennai 600 020....Respondent/Appellant Prayer:Appeal filed against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai dated 23/11/2012in ITA No.1804/Mds/2012 and order of Commissioner Income Tax(Appelas-V) dated 05.09.2012 in CIT (A) V/ITA No.123/2011-12against the order dated 21.11.2011 in PA/GIR No. AAACPH289P onthe file of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CompanyCircle V(1), Chennai - 34. For appellant: Mr.T.Ravikumar Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax. J U D G M E N T(Judgment of the Court was made by S.Manikumar,J) This Appeal has been filed against the order of the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Madras, dated 23/11/2012. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The substantial questions of law raised in the instantappeal are:- “1. Whether in the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal is right in holding thatthe notice issued under Section 148 of theAct is not valid for the reason that theassessee has disclosed fully and truly allthe necessary facts for completion of theassessment? 2. Whether in the facts andcircumstances of the case the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal is right in allowinggrounds of appeal regarding applicabilityof Section 94 (8) to the case of theassessee of appeal on merit, holding thatthe order passed by it in ITANo.1660/Mds/2009 and C.O.No.176/Mds/2009dated 13/8/2010 has become final though inthat case the Tribunal has only held thatthe issue was debatable and did notconclude this issue on merits onapplicability of Section 94 (8)?” 3. Mr.T.RaviKumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel forIncome Tax submitted that the tax implication in the instantappeal is less than the ceiling limit fixed by the Circularbearing No.21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015. He further submittedthat as per the Circular, Tax Case Appeal has been instructed tobe withdrawn. 4. Placing on record the above submissions, whiledismissing the Tax Case Appeal No.335 of 2013, as withdrawn,substantial questions of law raised are left open. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mvs. +1cc to Mr.R.Sivaraman, Advocate, S.R.No. 36789 +1cc to Mr.Mr.T.Ravikumar, Advocate, S.R.No. 35811 Tax Case Appeal No.335 of 2013 LRS(CO)PSI(23/07/2016)