The Commissioner Of Income Tax Pondicherry v. Dr.b.hari Hari Hospitals, Trichy Trunk Road, Villupuram

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:04.12.2018 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH Tax Case Appeal No.860 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax Pondicherry..... Appellant/AppellantVs. Dr.B.HariHari Hospitals, Trichy Trunk Road, Villupuram. .... Respondent/Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 29.12.2008 made inITA No.1231/Mds/2008 for the Assessment Year 2004-05. and against the Order dt: 29.02.2008 made in ITA.67/07-08for the Assessment Year 2004-2005 on the file of the Commissinerof Income Tax (Appeals) XII, Chennai 34 and against the orderdated 29.12.2006 made in PAN. 21705H for theAssessment Year 2004-2005 on the file of the AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax Circle II, Cuddalore. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar Sr. Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman for Mr.S.Sridhar This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue callingin question the correctness of the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated29.12.2008 made in ITA No.1231/Mds/2008 for the Assessment Year2004-05 by raising the following substantial question of law:"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal wasright in law in confirming the order of theCommissioner of Income tax (Appeals) even though theassessee himself was unable to substantiate theclaim of having incurred expenses towards fees paidto Doctors, purchase of lab chemicals and salarypayments to the staff is valid?" 2. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counselappearing for the Revenue that even though the name of therespondent is mentioned as Dr.B.Hari, Read (India) Ltd., thecorrect name of the respondent is Dr.B.Hari, which may be seenfrom the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 3. In view of the above, the name of the respondent beread as 'Dr.B.Hari' instead of 'Dr.B.Hari, Read (India) Ltd.' 4. 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. 5. 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 question of law for determination in an appropriatecase. Sd/-Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar sl To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 34. No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 34. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle II, Cuddalore. 4.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry. Pondicherry. TCA No.860 of 2009 KJ(CO)GN(07/01/2019)