The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.rayalla Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Chennai-41

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 30.8.2019 The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai...Appellant/ Respondent VsM/s.Rayalla Corporation Pvt.Ltd., Chennai-41....Respondent/ Appellant PAN :AABCR 7230 DAPPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961againsttheorderdated16.10.2015madeinITA.No.908/Mds/2015 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment year 2011-12against the order of the dated 04.02.15 and made inITA.NO.1163/2013-14 on the file of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax Appeals III,chennai and against the order dated03.03.2014 and made in PAN /GIR NO.AABCR 7230 D on the fileof the Deputy commisioner of Income Tax,Company Circle V(3)chennai.For Appellant: Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC andMrs.R.Hemalatha, SSC For Respondent:Mr.R.Venkatanarayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyer Padmanabhan Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar and Mrs.R.Hemalatha,learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant– Revenue and Mr.R. Venkatanarayanan, learned counselappearing for the respondent – assessee. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the orderdated 16.10.2015 made in ITA. No.908/Mds/2015 on the fileof the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench forthe assessment year 2011-12. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The appeal was admitted on 18.7.2016 on the followingsubstantial questions of law : “i. Whether, on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Tribunalwas right in holding that income fromletting out properties was businessincome and not income from houseproperty ? ii. Whether the finding of theTribunal is proper especially when theHigh Court in the assessee's own casefor earlier years has decided the issuein favour of the Department by holdingthat income from letting out ofproperty was assessable as income fromhouse property ? andiii. Whether on the facts andcircumstances of the case, the Tribunalwas right in law in restricting thedisallowance of expenses made underSection 14A to the extent of exemptincome especially when the AssessingOfficer had specifically invoked theprovisions of Rule 8D?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenueon account of the low tax effect in terms of CircularNo.17/2019 dated 08.8.2019 issued by the Central Board ofDirect Taxes. By the said Circular, the monetary limit forfiling or pursuing an appeal before the High Court has beenincreased to Rs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that thetax effect in this case is less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above taxcase appeal is dismissed on account of the low tax effect.The substantial questions of law framed are left open. Inthe event the tax effect is above the threshold limit fixedin the said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue tomake a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to beheard and decided on merits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI 'B' BENCH. 2.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CHENNAI3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS III,CHENNAI 4.THE DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX,COMPANY CIRCLE V(3) CHENNAI. +1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyer Padmanabhan, Advocate SR.No.75932 +1cc to Mr.T.Ravikumar , Advocate SR.No. 75259 TCA.No.351 of 2016 A.SK(14/11/2019)