The Commissioner Of Income Tax Coimbatore v. M/S.l.g.nithyanandan Rep.by Smt.krishnakumari

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR Tax Case (Appeal) No.703 of 2013 The Commissioner of Income TaxCoimbatore. ... Appellant Vs.M/s.L.G.Nithyanandanrep.by Smt.Krishnakumari204, Vivam ResidencyDe SaBa Colony, West Club RoadCoimbatore 641 018. .. Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal'B' Bench, Chennai dated 15.03.2013 in ITA No.2347/Mds/2012against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ICoimbatore dated 09.10.2012 for the Assessment year 2006-2007and against the order of the Income Tax Officer Ward III(1)Coimbatore dated 30.12.2011 P.A. No./GIR No. AAAHL7919R. J U D G M E N T (Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR.VINEETKOTHARI,J) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue callingin question the correctness of the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, by raising thefollowing substantial questions of law: “ 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right inholding that there was no transfer of capital asset bythe assessee during the previous year relevant toassessment year 2006-07 and the transfer had takenplace in the previous year relevant to assessment year1997-98?case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right inholding that there was no transfer of capital asset bythe assessee during the previous year relevant toassessment year 2006-07 and the transfer had takenplace in the previous year relevant to assessment year1997-98? https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was rightin holding that the possession of the property wastransferred by the assessee to the agreement holders,when agreement for sale was entered into? 3. Whether based on material available before it, theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal could have come to theconclusion that the assessee had put the agreementholders into possession of the property when agreementfor sale was entered into?” 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learnedStanding Counsel brought to our notice the Circular instructionissued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide CircularNo.17/2019 dated 8th August 2019, wherein, it is stipulated thatappeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before theHigh Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceedRs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). 3. In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the appeal filedby the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed, keeping open thesubstantial questions of law for determination in an appropriatecase. s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.Income Tax Appellate Tribunal'B' Bench,Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)ICoimbatore 3. The Income Tax officerWard III(1)Coimbatore https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/