Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Shri S.Ravi on 18 August, 2022
T.C.A.Nos.994 to 996 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.08.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
T.C.A.Nos.994 to 996 of 2019
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Central - II,
Chennai. ... Appellant in all
TCAs
Versus
Shri S.Ravi ... Respondent in all
TCAs
Appeals preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
against the order dated 19.01.2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos. 1784, 1785 and
1786/Mds/2008.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan
Senior Standing Counsel
M/s.V.Pushpa,
Standing Counsel in all TCAs
Page 1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.Nos.994 to 996 of 2019
For Respondent : died
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.)
These tax case appeals have been filed by the appellant / Revenue,
challenging the common order dated 19.01.2010 passed by the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos. 1784, 1785 and
1786/Mds/2008, relating to the respective assessment years 2002-03, 2004-05
and 2005-06.
2.By order dated 14.12.2010, this court admitted the aforesaid tax case
appeals on the following substantial questions of law:
“(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that
the sanction of the Panchayat President for division of agricultural
lands into plots and another sanction for building separate units
would amount to approval for any housing project as required under
Section 80IB (10) and in further holding that the condition of the
minimum area of 1acre for the project was satisfied? and
(ii) Without prejudice to the preceding question, whether on
the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleting the disallowance of
Page 2/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.Nos.994 to 996 of 2019
deduction under Section 80IB(10) claimed by the assessee in respect
of the 'housing project' at Valar Nagar, Uthangudi, Madurai even
though the condition that each residential unit should not have built-
up area of more than 1500sq.ft. was not satisfied by the assessee?"
3. When the matters were 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 appeals 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 these appeals 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 appeals, wherein, the tax effect is said
to be less than the monetary limit imposed, are dismissed as withdrawn,
keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in appropriate
cases. No costs.
(R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q., J.)
18.08.2022
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
Page 3/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.Nos.994 to 996 of 2019
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
av
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
“A” Bench, Chennai.
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Central - II, Chennai.
3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax,
Central Circle - II,
Madurai-625 002.
4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II,
Madurai.
T.C.A.Nos.994 to 996 of 2019
18.08.2022
Page 4/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
