The Commissioner Of Income Tax Pondicherry v. Shri Louis Sinnaya Arokiasamy381, M.g.road,Puducherry 605 001

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 1.2.2019 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH The Commissioner of Income Tax Pondicherry... Appellant Vs. Shri Louis Sinnaya Arokiasamy381, M.G.Road,Puducherry 605 001. .. 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 13.2.2008 made in ITANo.1708/Mds/2007. Against the proceedings of the Assistant Commissioner ofIncome Tax Circle-I, Puducherry, dated 08.06.2007 made inGI.No.702-L/Assessment Year 2002-03, and against the order ofthe Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-XI, 121, Mahatma GandhiRoad, Chennai, dated 29.03.2007 made in I.T.A.No.365/2005-06. For Appellant : Ms.K.G.Usha Rani, for Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar Standing Counsel For respondent : Mr.A.S.Sivaraman 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, 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 13.2.2008 madein ITA No.1708/Mds/2007, by raising the following substantialquestion of law: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Appellate Tribunal was right insetting aside the order of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals) and directing the assessingofficer to adopt the value of the land to be takenat Rs.4 per sqft. for the purpose of computing theCapital Gains of the land without any basis, eventhough the assessee himself shown in his Wealth-taxreturn, the value of the land at Rs.1.03 per sqft?" 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. 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 question of law for determination in an appropriatecase. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// ssk.To Sub Assistant Registrar 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax Pondicherry. 2. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle I, Puducherry. +1 cc to Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate Sr.No.9546 EV(CO)CSL/05.03.2019