Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Shri T.R. Pachamuthu on 22 April, 2021
Tax Case Appeal Nos.1148 to 1152 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
T.C.A.Nos.1148 to 1152 of 2010
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Central -1,
Chennai. ... Appellant in all TCAs
v.
Shri T.R. Pachamuthu,
No.4 & 5, Prakasam Street,
Janaki Nagar,Valasaravakkam,
Chennai - 600087. ... Respondent in all TCAs
Appeals preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai,
"A" Bench, dated 30.03.2010 in ITA.Nos.1673, 1674, 1675, 1683 &
1511/Mds/2007 for the Assessment Years 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05
and 2005-06.
For Appellant : Mr.T.R. Senthil Kumar
(in all TCAs) Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr. G. Baskar
(in all TCAs)
Page 1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos.1148 to 1152 of 2010
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M. DURAISWAMY, J.)
We have heard Mr.T.R. Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing
Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr. G.Baskar, learned counsel
for the respondent.
2. These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) are directed against the order
dated 30.03.2010 made in ITA.Nos.1673, 1674, 1675, 1683 &
1511/Mds/2007 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai, ''A'' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Assessment Years
Assessment Years 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06.
3. In the above appeals, the assessee has raised the following
Substantial Questions of Law for consideration:
“ (i) Whether on the facts and in
the Circumstances of the case, the
Page 2/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos.1148 to 1152 of 2010
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right
in upholding the deletion of the additions
towards the principal and interest in
respect of the unexplained pronote loans
stated to be taken on behalf of
M/s.Valliammal Society even though the
material, being copies of the pronotes
signed by the assessee discovered during
the search constituted a valid piece of
evidence, wrongly shifting the onus of
proof on the assessee under Section
132(4A), to the Assessing Officer,
especially when M/s. Valliammal Society
has not owned up the loans ?
(ii) Whether on the facts and in the
Circumstances of the case, the Income
Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in
deleting the additions on account of
unexplained cash deposits made by the
assessee wrongly assuming availability of
opening cash balance even though no
accounts have been maintained and the
assessee has not satisfactorily explained
Page 3/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos.1148 to 1152 of 2010
each deposit linking with specific source
therefor, that too by making a wrong
reference to para 65 of the Tribunal's
order in the case of Smt.P.Easwari which
dealt with some other issue?
iii. Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting
the addition of Rs.25 lakhs being
unexplained cash paid made for removing
encroachers without appreciating that the
presumption as per the sale agreement
was that such amount had actually been
paid and the onus of proving that no such
payment was made to the encroachers was
on the assessee ? ”
4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the
appellant submits that the above appeals are not pursued by the Revenue
on account of the Low Tax Effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019 dated
08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. By the said
Circular, the monetary limit for filing or pursuing an appeal before the
Page 4/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos.1148 to 1152 of 2010
High Court has been increased to Rs.1 crore. It is further submitted that
the tax effect in respective cases is less than the threshold limit.
5. In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax Case Appeals
are dismissed on account of the Low Tax Effect. The substantial
questions of law framed is left open. In the event the tax effect in the
respective cases is above the threshold limit fixed in the said Circular,
liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to
restore the appeals to be heard and decided on merits. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [K.R., J.]
22.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
Rj
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai “A” Bench
Page 5/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Tax Case Appeal Nos.1148 to 1152 of 2010
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
Rj
T.C.A.Nos.1148 to 1152 of 2010
22.04.2021
Page 6/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
