Madras High Court
The Principal Commissioner Of ... vs M/S.Aarthi Mahesh Jain on 4 January, 2021
TCA.No.481 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.1.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
Tax Case Appeal No.481 of 2020
The Principal Commissioner of Income
Tax, Non Corporate Ward 9(1),
Chennai-34 ...Appellant
Vs
M/s.Aarthi Mahesh Jain ...Respondent
APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against
the order dated 28.2.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai made in I.T.A.No.1167/Chny/2019
for the assessment year 2013-14.
For Appellant: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, SC
assisted by Mr.S.Rajesh, JSC
Judgment was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J
This appeal has been filed by the assessee under Section 260A of
the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) challenging the order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.481 of 2020
dated 28.2.2020 made in I.T.A.No.1167/Chny/2019 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, 'A' Bench ('the Tribunal' for
brevity) for the assessment year 2013-14.
2. The Revenue has filed this appeal by raising the following
substantial questions of law:
“1. Whether on the facts and
circumstances of the case and in law, the
Tribunal was right and justified in setting aside
the order passed by the Assessing Officer to
reexamine the matter when the Assessing
Officer has already duly examined the matter
before passing the assessment order ?
2. Whether on the facts and
circumstances of the case and in law, the
Tribunal was right and justified in not
dismissing the appeal of the assessee as done
by the ITAT 'A' Bench, Chennai in ITA.No.827/
Chny/2019 dated 11.6.2019 in the case of
Smt.Rekha Jain and by the ITAT 'C' Bench,
Chennai in ITA.No.3009/Chny/2018 in the case
of Harish Kumar HUF, when the facts and
circumstances of those cases are exactly
similar to the present case ? And
3. Whether on the facts and
circumstances of the case and in law, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.481 of 2020
Tribunal was right and justified in remitting the
issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer
and shifting the onus to the Revenue with a
direction that the Assessing Officer shall bring
on record the role of the assessee in promoting
the company and the relationship of the
assessee, if any with the promoters, role of the
assessee in inflating the prices of shares,
etc.?”
3. We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Standing
Counsel appearing for the appellant/Revenue.
4. The learned 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 08.8.2019 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 on account of the low tax effect. The substantial questions
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.481 of 2020
T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J
AND
R.N.MANJULA,J
RS
of law raised are left open. In the event the tax effect is above the
threshold limit fixed in the said circular, liberty is granted to the
Revenue to file a petition before this Court to restore the appeal to be
heard and decided on merits.
04.1.2021
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai.
TCA.No.481 of 2020
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
