Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs K.Inbasagaran on 23 August, 2021
T.C.A.No.315 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.08.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
T.C.A.No.315 of 2013
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant
Vs.
K.Inbasagaran ... Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, “D” Bench,
dated 31.05.2012 in I.TA.No.953/Mds/2009, Assessment Year 1994-95.
For Appellant : Mr.J.Narayanaswamy
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman
for Mr.S.Sridhar
JUDGMENT
Page 1/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.315 of 2013
(Judgment was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)
We have heard Mr.J.Narayanaswamy, learned Senior Standing
Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman for Mr.S.Sridhar,
learned counsel for the respondent/assessee.
2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for brevity) is directed against the order dated
31.05.2012 made in I.TA.No.953/Mds/2009 on the file of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “D” Bench (“the Tribunal” for brevity) for the
Assessment Year 1994-95.
3.The appeal was admitted on 26.11.2013 on the following substantial
question of law:
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case, the Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs.18.1
lakhs with respect to unexplained investment without going into
the merits of the addition and by merely relying on the judicial
proceedings concerning Prevention of Corruption Act, in which
the revenue was not the party to that judicial proceedings?”
Page 2/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.315 of 2013
4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant submits that
the above appeal is 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 High Court has been increased to
Rs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is less than
the threshold limit.
5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax Case Appeal is
dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low Tax Effect. The substantial
question of law framed is left open. In the event the tax effect in this case 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 appeal to be heard
and decided on merits. No costs.
(T.S.S., J.) (S.S.K., J.)
23.08.2021
(2/3)
mkn
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
Page 3/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.315 of 2013
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “D” Bench
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai.
Page 4/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
T.C.A.No.315 of 2013
T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.
and
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.
mkn
T.C.A.No.315 of 2013
23.08.2021
(2/3)
Page 5/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
