The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Chennai v. M/S.indwell Lianings Pvt. Ltd.,Chennai-102

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 20.8.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.188 of 2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chennai Vs M/s.Indwell Lianings Pvt. Ltd.,Chennai-102. ...Appellant ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 26.11.2010 made in C.O.No.91/Mds/2007 inITA.No.1631/Mds/ 2007 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench for the assessment year 2002-03,against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal inMP.NO.77/mds/2010 in ITA.NO.1631/mds/2007 dated 18.06.10 againstthe order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal inITA.NO.1631/mds/2007 and C.O.No.91/mds/2007 dated 13.06.08against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) inITA.NO.529/06-07/A-III dated 27.03.2007 against the order of theAssistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle II(3),Chennai dated 30.10.06. For Appellant: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, SSC For Respondent:Mr.G.Baskar Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue and Mr.G.Baskar,learned counsel appearing for the respondent – assessee. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated26.11.2010 made in C.O. No.91/Mds/2007 in ITA.No.1631/Mds/2007on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' 1/3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Bench for the assessment year 2002-03. 3. The appeal was admitted on 28.6.2011 on the followingsubstantial question of law :“Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding thatthe Assessing Officer had no valid reason toassume jurisdiction under Section 147 of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 to reopen theassessment for the assessment year 2002-03especially on the grounds that no freshmaterial or information came to hispossession after the intimation underSection 143(1)(a) and on the date of theintimation, the law was in favour of theassessee?” 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 08.8.2019 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 on account of the low tax effect. Thesubstantial question of law framed is left open. In the eventthe tax effect is above the threshold limit fixed in the saidcircular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention tothis Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided onmerits. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench. 2/3 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-III,Chennai-34. 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Company Circle II(3), Chennai-34. +1cc to M/s.Sree Lakshmi Valli, Advocate sr.71036 TCA.No.188 of 2011 ppa(co)nr 31/10/2019 3/3