The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ward 2, Vellore-1 v. Shri B.s.venkatesan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward 2, Vellore-1....AppellantVsShri B.S.Venkatesan...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order dated 22.1.2019 made in ITA.No.736/Chny/2018 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench forthe assessment year 2010-11. For Appellant: Mrs.V.Pushpa, SCFor Respondent:Mr.B.Christ Das Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,JWe have heard Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counselappearing for the appellant – Revenue and Mr.B.Christ Daslearned counsel appearing for the respondent – assessee. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directedagainst the order dated 22.1.2019 made in ITA.No.736/Chny/2018on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A'Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2010-11. 3. The Revenue has filed this appeal by raising the followingsubstantial questions of law :“i. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding thatthe property belongs to HUF and not to beassessable in the hands of the individualassessee ? https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ii. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding thatthe property belongs to HUF when such pleawas not raised by the assessee before any ofthe Lower Authorities and they did not haveany opportunity to adjudicate the same ? andiii. Whether, on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal erred in holding that theproperty belongs to HUF when there is nomaterial on record to support the claim ofthe assessee and whether the alleged HUF hasany PAN or the property has been disclosedit is accounts ? ” 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 questions of law raised are 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(CS VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ToThe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench.A.SK(09/11/2020) TCA.No.363 of 2019