The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Chennai v. Mrs.jayasathya Suresh,Ambojini Poes Road, 2[Nd] Street,Teynampet, Chennai-600 018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 01.11.2018 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESHANDTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM Tax Case Appeal No.284 of 2018 The Commissioner of Income tax,Chennai. ...Appellant -vs- Mrs.Jayasathya Suresh,Ambojini Poes Road, 2[nd] Street,Teynampet, Chennai-600 018. ...Respondent Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 21.09.2017 made in ITANo.2932/Mds/2014 against the order of the Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeals-V), Chennai 34 in ITA No.199/13-14(A)-V dated19.08.2014 for the Assessment Year 2010-11 and against the orderof Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Business Circle-XV,Chennai 34, dated 14.03.2013 in PAN NO. for theAssessment year 2010-11. For Appellant :Mr.T.Ravikumar,Standing Counsel JUDGMENT (Delivered by HULUVADI G.RAMESH, J.) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue callingin question the correctness of the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated21.09.2017 made in ITA No.2932/Mds/2014, raising the followingsubstantial questions of law: "(i)Whether the claim under Section 54 of theIncome Tax Act is to be allowed even when the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ expenditure incurred were only on repairs, servicemaintenance and interior decoration on two floorswhich were already built in the assessment year2007-08 and had already been assessed to propertytax by the Corporation? (ii)Whether the Tribunal was right in allowingthe claim of the assessee especially when theassessee herself had admitted vide submission dated20.02.2013 that the Corporation assessment for theentire property in respect of ground floor, 1[st], 2[nd]and 3[rd] floors of the residential building wasalready done for the first time during the 2[nd] halfof the FY 2007-08 itself which would clearly showthat the construction of the property was alreadycompleted, before or during the assessment year2007-08 itself? (iii)Whether the finding of the Tribunal thatthe amount of Rs.1.20 Crores that had been paid toReal Value Promoters out of the sale considerationof the assessee's flat for construction is to beallowed, especially when the amount spent by RealValue Promoter after the date of transfer was onlyRs.3,12,825/- which would clearly show that thecompletion certificate issued by the Builder cannotbe relied upon, since assessee's husband is Directorin the said company and had vested interest in thatcompany? (iv)Whether the Tribunal was right in allowingthe claim of the assessee under Section 54especially when the ledger accounts produced clearlyindicate that the payments made to the parties werein the nature of providing home theater, securityservices, decoration services, facility managementservices, interior decoration, generator maintenanceservices, lift services, swimming pool maintenance,A/C maintenance charges which are all in the natureof mere services to enhance the life style in adwelling and are not for making the residencehabitual?” 2.When the matter is taken up for admission, the learnedStanding Counsel appearing for the appellant brought to ournotice the Circular instruction issued by the Central Board ofDirect Taxes vide Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 wherein itis stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by theDepartment before the High Court in cases where the tax effectdoes not exceed Rs.50 lakhs. 3. In the instant case, the tax effect is less than themonetary limit imposed and therefore, the appeal is dismissed asnot pressed, preserving the substantial questions of law fordetermination in an appropriate case. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// KM To Sub Assistant Registrar 2.When the matter is taken up for admission, the learnedStanding Counsel appearing for the appellant brought to ournotice the Circular instruction issued by the Central Board ofDirect Taxes vide Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 wherein itis stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by theDepartment before the High Court in cases where the tax effectdoes not exceed Rs.50 lakhs. 3. In the instant case, the tax effect is less than themonetary limit imposed and therefore, the appeal is dismissed asnot pressed, preserving the substantial questions of law fordetermination in an appropriate case. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// KM To Sub Assistant Registrar 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai.2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal-V),Chennai-34.3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Business Circle-XV,Chennai-34.4. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai.Copy To:The Assistant Registrar,Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,III Floor, Rajaji Bhavan,Besand Nagar, Chennai-90.+1 cc to Mr.T.Ravikumar, Advocate Sr.No.75607Tax Case Appeal No.284 of 2018RJ(CO)CSL/29.11.2018