The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.kutty Flush Doors & Furniture Company Pvt. Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATE: 05.02.2021 CORAM: THE HON-BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON-BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI T.C.A.No.529 of 2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax,No.121, Nungambakkam High Road,Chennai ? 600 034.... AppellantVs. M/s.Kutty Flush Doors & FurnitureCompany Pvt. Ltd.,167, Poonamallee High Road,Koyambedu, Chennai ? 600 107.... Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras, “C“ Bench, dated 29.10.2014 in I.TA.No.2018/Mds/2014Assessment Year 2007-08. against the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-II, 121 MahatmaGandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034, dated 26/02/2014,ITA.No.1399/2013-2014 G.I.No./P.A.No.AAAck1422F for theAssessment year 2007-2008 and against the order of the AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) Room No.514,New Block 121 M.G.Road Chennai 600 034 dated 11/11/2011PAN/GIR/No.AAACK1422F, WARD/Circle/ACIT; Company Circle II(4)Status Company for the Assessment year 2007-2008. For Appellant : Mr.Karthick Ranganathan, Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.S.Sridhar JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mr.Karthick Ranganathan, learned SeniorStanding Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.S.Sridhar,learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) are directedagainst the order dated 29.10.2014 made in I.TA.No.2018/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai, “C“ Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for theAssessment Year 2007~08. 3.The appeal was admitted on 23.07.2015 on the followingsubstantial questions of law: ?1)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in applyingthe value of the land at the average of the valuation rateadopted by the assessee for the purpose of arriving at the fairmarket value (FMV) of the property as on 01.04.1981 especiallywhen no such method is provided in the Income Tax Act or Rules? 2)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in rejecting the valueadopted by the Revenue on the basis of the guideline value,which is fixed by the SRO in the area where the land is situated? 3)Whether the guideline value issued by the State Governmentcould not be the basis for arriving at the Fair Market Value ofthe property especially when the assessee did not produce anyother evidence other than an valuation report which supports itscase? 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. -s/d- Assistant RegistrarTrue CopySub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “C“ Bench 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeasl)-II, 121 Mahatma Gandhi Road NungambakkamChennai 600 034 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Incomt TaxCompany Circle IV(4) Room No.514 New Block 121 M.G.Road, Chennai-600 034 T.C.A.No.529 of 2015aa25/02/2021