The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. Shri.r.ashokan, Auro, D

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI T.C.A.No.797 of 2013 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai. ... AppellantVs. Shri.R.Ashokan,Auro, D-37, Anna Nagar (East),Chennai – 600 102.... Respondent Tax Case Appeal preferred under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Chennai, “C” Bench, dated 05.09.2011 inI.T.A.No.2063/Mds/2010, Assessment Year 2000-01, against theorder of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) dated06.09.2010 and made in ITA.NO.4/2010-11 and against the orderof the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Company Circle VI(1), Chennai dated 08.03.2010 and made in PAN: /2000-01/5123-P. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : No appearance JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior StandingCounsel, for the appellant/Revenue. 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainsttheorderdated05.09.2011madeinI.T.A.No.2063/Mds/2010 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai, “C” Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) forthe Assessment Year 2000-01. 3.The Revenue has raised the following substantialquestions of law in the above appeal :“1.Whether on the facts and circumstances ofhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the CIT(A) who heldthat the impugned order passed on invalid assumptionof jurisdiction under Section 154 was bad? 2.Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right innot following the judgment of the Madras High Courtin the case of Dollar Apparels reported in 294 ITR484 wherein it was stated that the assessee wouldnot be eligible for deduction u/s.80HHC in respectof interest income earned on deposit since there wasno direct nexus between the interest income andexport earnings ?” 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.By the said Circular, the monetary limit for filing orpursuing an appeal before the High Court has been increased toRs.1 crore. It is further submitted that the tax effect inthis case is less than the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above TaxCase Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the LowTax Effect. The substantial questions of law framed are leftopen. In the event the tax effect in this case is above thethreshold limit fixed in the said Circular, liberty isgranted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court torestore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. Nocosts. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mkn To 1.The Deputy/Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “C” Bench 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle VI(1), Chennai-34. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ +1cc to Mr.T.Ravi kumar, Sr.Standing Counsel, SR.11554 T.C.A.No.797 of 2013 MP(CO)CB(18/03/2021)