The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. Shri Jagadish A Sadarangani Romar Fashions Romar House

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 22.03.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI T.C.A.No.1016 of 2014 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai. ... AppellantVs. Shri Jagadish A SadaranganiRomar Fashions Romar House,15, Jagannathan Road,Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 034.... RespondentPRAYER:Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal,Madras,“A”Bench,dated20.06.2014inI.T.A.No.235/Mds/2014, Assessment Year 2010-11. Preferredagainst the order dated 31.10.2013, passed in ITA.No.1711/2013-14, by the Commissioner of Income -Tax (Appeals)-III, Chennai-34, against the order of the Assistant Commissioner of IncomeTax, Company Circle-III(2), Chennai-34, dated 21.02.2013, madein PAN/GIR No. , for the assessment year 2010-11. For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent : Mr.R.Sivaraman JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.R.Sivaraman, learnedcounsel for the respondent/assessee. 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed againstthe order dated 20.06.2014 made in I.T.A.No.235/Mds/2014 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “A” Bench(for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2010-11. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The appeal was admitted on 10.12.2014 on the followingsubstantial questions of law: “1)Whether on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal wasright in holding that the additions made towardsnotional interest income is to be deleted? 2.Whether on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal was right in holding thatthe disallowance of advance made to VamanaPictures has to be allowed even though theassessee has not offered any amount of interestas income pertaining to the said advances? 3.Whether there was any enough material forthe Tribunal to come to the conclusion and grantrelief to the assessee on the facts that theassessee had never recognized any income on theadvances made and the amount itself become badand irrecoverable and therefore the question ofcharging interest also does not arise especiallywhen the assessee is following mercantile systemof accounting?” 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellantsubmits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue onaccount of the Low Tax Effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. Bythe said Circular, the monetary limit for filing or pursuing anappeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 crore.It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is lessthan the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax CaseAppeal is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low TaxEffect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open.In the event the tax effect in this case is above the thresholdlimit fixed in the said Circular, liberty is granted to theRevenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal tobe heard and decided on merits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mkn To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “A” Bench 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. Chennai. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, Chennai-34. 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-III(2) Chennai-34. Chennai-34. +1 cc to M/s.M.Swaminathan,Advocate Sr No.18575 SSV(CO) RG.26.04.2021(3P/6C) T.C.A.No.1016 of 201422.03.2021 (2/2)