PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF vs. SHRI T.R.PACHAMUTHU

TCA.No.324 of 2018 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 15.12.2020 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.324 of 2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-1, Chennai ...Appellant Vs Shri T.R.Pachamuthu ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 28.10.2013 made in ITA.No.989/Mds/2013 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment year 2001-02. For Appellant: Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC & Ms.K.G.Usharani, JSC For Respondent: Mr.N.Devanathan Judgment was delivered by

T.S.Sivagnanam,J

We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel and Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Junior Standing Counsel 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.324 of 2018 appearing for the appellant – Revenue and Mr.N.Devanathan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed against the order dated 28.10.2013 made in ITA.No.989/Mds/2013 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2001-02. 3. The appeal has been admitted on 06.12.2019 on the following substantial questions of law : “i. Whether the ITAT was right in granting the relief when the assessee had given three different explanations at three different times without any proof of its claim by producing bills and vouchers? ii. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, has the assessee rebutted the presumption u/s. 132(4A) with regard to the seized material such that there is no cause for addition in his hands? and iii. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee has discharged onus as well as burden of proof in establishing that the funds withdrawn at different points of time were only for 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.324 of 2018 construction activity of the society such that there is no case for addition in his hands ?” 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 08.8.2019 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 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 file a petition before this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. 15.12.2020 To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench. RS 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.324 of 2018 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J RS TCA.No.324 of 2018 15.12.2020 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/