The Commissioner Of Income Tax Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034 v. M/S.anjaneya Printers Pvt. Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 12.12.2018 CORAMTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH Tax Case No.901 of 2005 The Commissioner of Income Tax Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. .... Appellant /Respondent Vs. .... Respondent/Appellant M/s.Anjaneya Printers Pvt. Ltd.,18, III Street, East Abiramapuram,Chennai – 600 004. Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai, dated 27.12.2004 made in IT(SSA)No.87(Mds)/98 for the block period 1994-95 to 1996-97,against the order dated 6/3/1998 made in PA/GIR.No.101A passedby the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle II(2), Chennai -34, for the Block Period 1994-95 to 1996-97. For Appellant : Mrs.Premalatha for M.Swaminathan Sr.Standing Counsel J U D G M E N T This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue callingin question the correctness of the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai, dated27.12.2004 made in IT(SSA)No.87(Mds)/98 for the block period1994-95 to 1996-97 by raising the following substantialquestions of law: "(i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income Tax Tribunalis right in law in treating the share application https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ money as unexplained cash credits, non allowing ofinterest and treating it as income? (ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income Tax Tribunalis right in law in holding that an amount ofRs.35.00 lakhs treated as unexplained cash creditswas not to be added in the block assessment? (iii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income Tax Tribunalis right in law in detailing the additions made inthe block assessment especially when the bankaccounts did not reveal any substantial adequatewithdrawals nearer to the relevant dates and thesource for the advances remained unexplained creditsunder Sec.68 of the Income Tax Act? (iv) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income Tax Tribunalis right in law in setting aside the blockassessment especially when the assessing officer hadheld that the payments have not been made toM/s.Jaya Publications for the purchases made evenafter a lapse of thirty six months which wouldclearly indicate that the alleged purchases wereonly accommodation purchases and trade credits? (v) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income Tax Tribunalis right in not considering the fact that theassessee had not filed the return of income eitherwithin the due date or till the date of search andthe undisclosed income detected on the materialsavailable before the assessing officer would be partof the undisclosed income under section 68 of theIncome Tax Act?” 2. When the matter is taken up for admission, the learnedStanding Counsel brought to our notice the Circular instructionissued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide CircularNo.3/2018 dated 11.7.2018 wherein it is stipulated that appealsshall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the HighCourt in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.50 lakhs. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 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. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarslTo1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai.2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II(2), Chennai-34.TC No.901 of 2005ssd[co]srg 24/01/2019