Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs T.V.Magaadevan (Deceased) on 5 August, 2022
T.C.A.No.364 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 05.08.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
Tax Case Appeal No.364 of 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Central II
Chennai .. Appellant
Vs.
1.T.V.Magaadevan (Deceased)
2.M.Chithradevi
3.M.Kruthika
4.Minor M.Swarthmika
represented by her mother and natural guardian
M.Chitradevi
5.V.Reginaganatham .. Respondents
(RR2 to 5 impleaded vide order of this Court dated 4.1.2022)
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
against the order dated 25.09.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai, in I.T(SS).A.No.52(Mds)2005.
For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan
For Respondent : Mr.K.Ravi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/4
T.C.A.No.364 of 2009
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.)
This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant/Revenue, calling in
question the correctness of the order dated 25.09.2008 passed by the Income
Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai, in I.T(SS).A.No.52(Mds)2005.
2. By order dated 27.04.2009, this Court admitted the aforesaid tax case
appeal on the following substantial questions of law :
“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting or reducing the
various additions made in the block assessment made for the
block period ending 24.09.1996 without considering the relevant
evidence and material discussed in the assessment order including
the statement under Section 132(4) of the Act recorded at the time
of search and relying on irrelevant material?
2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in reducing the addition on
account of personal expenditure by 40% accepting the claim of
agricultural income not supported by any evidence and ignoring
the details given in the assessment order regarding the insufficient
drawings of the family members?
3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in reducing the addition on
account of cash found during search by 50% accepting the claim
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.364 of 2009
of agricultural income not supported by any evidence and
ignoring the details given in the assessment order regarding the
insufficient drawings of the family members?”
3. When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel
for the appellant/Revenue brought to the notice of this court the Circular
No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019, issued by the Central Board Direct Taxes,
wherein, it is stipulated that appeal shall not be filed/pursued by the Department
before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed
Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). It is also submitted that the tax effect in
this appeal is less than the threshold limit.
4. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel
for the appellant/Revenue, the present appeal, wherein, the tax effect is said to
be less than the monetary limit imposed, is dismissed as withdrawn, keeping
open the substantial questions of law for determination in an appropriate case.
No costs.
[R.M.D, J.] [M.S.Q, J.]
05.08.2022
Index : Yes / No
gya
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.364 of 2009
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
AND
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
gya
To
1.The Commissioner of Income Tax
Central II
Chennai
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Circle II(4)
Chennai
3. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
'D' Bench
Chennai Tax Case Appeal No.364 of 2009
05.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
