THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. S.R. JEYASHANKAR

TCA.Nos.147 & 148 of 2021 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 16.2.2021 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA Tax Case Appeal Nos.147 & 148 of 2021 & CMP.No.2723 of 2021 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai ...Appellant in both TCAs Vs Shri S.R.Jeyashankar ...Respondent in both TCAs APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order dated 03.4.2017 made respectively in ITA.Nos. 2930 and 3171/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench for the assessment year 2012-13. For Appellant: MrsR.Hemalatha, SSC For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by

T.S.Sivagnanam,J)

We have heard Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.Nos.147 & 148 of 2021 appearing for the appellant – Revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel accepting notice for the respondent – assessee. 2. These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, the Act), are directed against the common order dated 03.4.2017 made respectively in ITA.Nos.2930 and 3171/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench (for short, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2012-13. 3. The Revenue filed these appeals by raising the following substantial questions of law : “i. Whether the Tribunal was right in deleting the disallowance made under Section 54(1) especially when the assessee did not fulfil the conditions mandated under the provisions of Section 54(2) for availing the benefits of deduction under Section 54(1) in respect of unutilized amount which is to be deposited in capital gain account scheme on or before the due date for filing of the return under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act? And ii. Whether the claim of deduction under Section 54 is to be allowed even if the assessee had not fulfilled the conditions 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.Nos.147 & 148 of 2021 prescribed under the Act by depositing the unutilized amount of Rs.89,66,339/- in the capital gains accounts scheme within the time allowed under Section 139 of the Income Tax Act ?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant submits that the above appeals are 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 the respective cases is less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above tax case appeals are dismissed on account of the low tax effect. The substantial questions of law raised are left open. In the event the tax effect in the respective cases 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 appeals to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. Consequently, the connected CMP is also dismissed.

16.2.2021 RS 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.Nos.147 & 148 of 2021 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND R.N.MANJULA,J RS To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench. TCA.Nos.147 & 148 of 2021 & CMP.No.2723 of 2021 16.2.2021 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/