The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central 2, Chennai-34 v. M/S.tagore Educational Trust

In the High Court of Judicature at MadrasDated : 13.11.2018 The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM The Honourable Mr.Justice N.SATHISH KUMAR The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central 2,Chennai-34. ...Appellant/AppellantVsM/s.Tagore Educational Trust, No.29 Tilak Street, T.Nagar, Chennai. ...Respondent/Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the order dated 20.2.2018 in ITA No.1830/Chny/2017 onthe file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai 'C' Benchfor the assessment year 2008-09, against the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -17, Chennai dated31.3.2017, and made in I.TA No.206/15-16/(TT(A)-17, against theorder passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions) Chennai Circle, Chennai. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC For Respondent : No appearance Judgment was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. 2. The Revenue has preferred this appeal challenging theorder passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal inITA.Nos.1830/Chny/2017 for the assessment year 2008-09. 3. The above tax case appeal is filed raising the followingsubstantial questions of law :“i. Whether the Appellate Tribunal iscorrect in law in upholding the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) without https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ appreciating the fact that the assesseeviolated the provisions of Section 13(1)(d)read with Section 11(5) of the Act byparking funds as advances/loans in othertrusts and thereby disentitled for thebenefit of exemption under Section 11 of theIncome Tax Act? Andii. Whether the loans and advancesgiven to other trusts registered underSection 12AA do fall in one or more of theforms or modes specified under Section 11(5)of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” 4. It may not be necessary for us to answer the abovesubstantial questions of law, as the monetary limit in thisappeal is lesser than the amount fixed by the circularinstructions issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. ThisCourt had an occasion to consider the effect of that circular inTCA.No.395 of 2018 dated 24.7.2018, the relevant portions ofwhich are as follows : “4. Further, it is relevant to notethat by Circular No.3/2018, dated 11.7.2018,monetary limit has further been increasedand appeals be maintainable before the HighCourts. It has been increased toRs.50,00,000/-. Hence, viewed from anyangle, this appeal could not have beenfiled.5. Thus, by applying the above Circularissued by the CBDT, this appeal ought not tohave been filed by the Revenue and hence,for that reason, this tax case appeal isdismissed and the substantial questions oflaw, framed for consideration, are leftopen.” 5. Though the assessment was reopened under Section 147 ofthe said Act, the learned Senior Standing Counsel for theRevenue submits that there is no audit objection. 6. In the light of the above, the above appeal is dismissed.The substantial questions of law raised are left open forconsideration. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AS) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench. Chennai 'C' Bench. 2.The Commissioner of Income tax, (Appeal)-17, Chennai. 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai Circle, Chennai. Chennai Circle, Chennai. 4.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-2, Chennai-34. +1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Advocate Sr.77558 TCA.No.766 of 2018 BS(CO)SRG 14/12/2018