The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 vs. Smt. Amudha Sukumar

T.C.A.No.297 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19.10.2024 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN Tax Case Appeal No.297 of 2022 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I Chennai. .... Appellant Vs. Smt.Amudha Sukumar .... Respondent ----- Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 12.04.2022 made in I.T.A.No.883 of 2016. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy ----- J U D G M E N T (Delivered by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue calling in question the correctness of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai by raising the following substantial questions of law: https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.297 of 2022 "(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the excess amount of Rs.7 Crores received by the Assessee from KGS Developers Ltd as compensation was liable to be taxed as long term capital gains in the hands of the Assessee even though there was no transfer of any capital assets? (ii) Is not reasoning and finding of the Tribunal bad since the excess amount of Rs.7 Crores earned by the Assessee was due to the forfeiture clause in the agreement which has resulted in earning income from other sources only and being a revenue receipt has to be assessed under the said head? 2. It is brought to our notice by the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant Revenue that in the instant case, as per the CBDT's Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the appeal can be disposed of, keeping the substantial questions of law raised in this appeal open for adjudication at a later point of time. 3. It is further submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that to an e- mail communication dated 04.10.2024 requesting instructions as to whether this case is covered under low tax effect, the reply given by the Revenue is in the affirmative. Therefore, based on such instructions from the Revenue, the learned Standing Counsel submits that this appeal can be disposed of. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.297 of 2022 4. Recording the aforesaid submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant Revenue, this Tax Case Appeal is dismissed for low tax effect, keeping open the substantial questions of law for adjudication at appropriate stage. No costs. (R.S.K.,J.) (C.S.N.,J.) 19.10.2024 NCS : Yes/No Index : Yes/No KST To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.297 of 2022 R.SURESH KUMAR, J. AND C.SARAVANAN, J. KST T.C.A.No.297 of 2022 19.10.2024 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis