The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Chennai v. Shri Jagadish A Sadarangani16, Velayudham Street,Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 22.03.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYAND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI T.C.A.No.7 of 2014 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai. ... Appellant Vs. Shri Jagadish A Sadarangani16, Velayudham Street,Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondent PRAYER:Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal,Madras,“A”Bench,dated17.04.2013inI.T.A.No.2267/Mds/2012,AssessmentYear2009-10. Preferred against the order dated 14.06.2012, passed inITA.No.297/2011-12/A.III, by the Commissioner of Income -Tax(Appeals)-III, Chennai-34, against the order of the AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-III(2), Chennai-34,dated 28.12.2011, made in PAN/GIR No. , for theassessment year 2010-11. For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.R.Sivaraman JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.R.Sivaraman, learnedcounsel for the respondent/assessee. 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed againstthe order dated 17.04.2013 made in I.T.A.No.2267/Mds/2012 on thefile of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “A” Bench(for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2009-10. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The appeal was admitted on 19.11.2014 on the followingsubstantial questions of law:“1)Whether on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal wasright in holding that the additions made towardsnotional interest income is to be deleted? 2.Whether on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal wasright in holding that the disallowance of advancemade to Vammanna Picture was to be allowed eventhough the assessee has not offered any amount ofinterest as income pertaining to the saidadvances? 3.Is not the finding of the Tribunalperverse by holding that the money advanced was apersonal courtesy especially when it had no nexuswith the business nor any business considerationof the assessee existed?” 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 08.08.2019 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 as withdrawn on account of the Low TaxEffect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open.In the event the tax effect in this case is above the thresholdlimit fixed in the said Circular, liberty is granted to theRevenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal tobe heard and decided on merits. No costs. Assistant Registrar Sub Assistant Registrar mkn https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “A” Bench 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. Chennai. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, Chennai-34. 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-III(2) Chennai-34. Chennai-34. +1 cc to M/s.M.Swaminathan,Advocate Sr No.18576 SSV(2ND)RG.26.04.2021(3P/6C) T.C.A.No.7 of 2014 22.03.2021 (1/2)