COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, vs. M/S.TAMIL NADU REAL ESTATE

T.C.A.No.308 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.308 of 2017 Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Company Circle III, Chennai. .. Appellant -vs- M/s.Tamilnadu Real Estate Private Limited, C/o.M/s.S.Venkataram & Co. Chartered Accountants, 218, TTK Road, Alwarpet, Chennai-600 018. PAN: AABCT 5912 E .. Respondent Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 30.11.2016, made in W.T.A.No.23/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2006-07. For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan, Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa Standing Counsel For Respondent : Ms.J.Sree Vidhya ****** 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.308 of 2017 JUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 30.11.2016, made in W.T.A.No.23/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2006-07. 2.The appeal has been admitted on 11.08.2017, on the following substantial questions of law:- “(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, in law, Tribunal was right and justified in holding that vacant land at Nungambakkam is not eligible to Wealth Tax Act though it is a taxable asset as per Sec.2(ea)(v) of the said Act? and (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, in law, Tribunal erred in solely relying on a photocopy of a tax receipt to prove the existence of building when the letter of assessee filed before Assessing Officer as well as valuation report prove otherwise and thus the impugned order of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal is unsustainable?” 3.Heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.308 of 2017 by Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant – and Ms.J.Sree Vidhya, learned counsel for the respondent. 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel 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 fixed in the said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. (T.S.S., J.) (V.B.S., J.) 29.08.2019 abr T.S.Sivagnanam, J. and 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.308 of 2017 V.Bhavani Subbaroyan, J. (abr) T.C.A.No.308 of 2017 29.08.2019 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in