Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Shri Kushal Chand on 25 January, 2021
TCA.No.70 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.01.2021
CORAM :
The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
The Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA
Tax Case Appeal No.70 of 2021
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Non-Corporate Ward 9(2),
Chennai. ...Appellant
Vs
Shri Kushal Chand ...Respondent
APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the
order dated 28.08.2018 made in ITA.No.3008/Chny/2017 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench, for the assessment year
2013-14.
For Appellant: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent: Mr.G.Baskar
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.70 of 2021
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J)
This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed against the order dated
28.08.2018 made in ITA.No.3008/Chny/2017 on the file of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the
assessment year 2013-14.
2. The Revenue has raised the following substantial questions of
law for consideration:
"1. Whether on the facts and circumstances
of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT erred in law in
holding that the reference to Sec 50C was not
warranted in this case, as reference to DVO is
mandatory as per provisions of Sec 50C of the IT
Act?
2. Whether on the facts and circumstances
and in law, the ITAT is correct in not taking into
account the report of the DVO to whom it is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.70 of 2021
referred at the request of the assessee as per the
provisions of Sec 50C of the Act?"
3. We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior
Standing Counsel for the Appellant – Revenue and Mr.G.Baskar, learned
counsel appearing for the respondent.
4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing 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 on account of the low tax effect. The substantial questions of law
framed are left open. In the event the tax effect is above the threshold limit
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.70 of 2021
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. No
costs.
(T.S.S.,J.) (R.N.M.,J.)
25.01.2021
Index: Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking Judgment/Non speaking Judgment
hvk
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.70 of 2021
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Madras 'B' Bench.
2. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Non-Corporate Ward 9(2),
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.70 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J
AND
R.N.MANJULA,J
hvk
TCA.No.70 of 2021
25.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
