THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. GAYATRI RAO

T.C.A.No.506 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 26.08.2022 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.No.506 of 2019 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ... Appellant Versus Smt.Gayatri Rao, C/o.Shri N.Sreekanth, GSSS & Associates, 188, Poonamallee High Road, Ground Floor, Middle Block, Chennai - 600 010. ... Respondent (PAN No.AADPR3043D) Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “SMC” Bench, dated 07.08.2015 in I.TA.No.531/Mds/2015. For Appellant : Mr.Karthick Ranganathan Standing Counsel Page 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.506 of 2019 J U D G M E N T (Judgment was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the order dated 07.08.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'SMC' Bench in I.T.A.No.531/Mds/2015, relating to the assessment year 2006-07, by raising the following substantial questions of law:- "(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding the base year was 1981 and not the year in which the assessee had become the owner of the assets by way of inheritance for the purpose of computing index cost of acquisition? (ii) Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad especially when as per Explanation (iii) to Section 48 clearly states that the index cost of acquisition would be the year the asset was transferred for the first year in which the asset was held by the assessee or for the year beginning on 01.04.198 whichever was later? " 2. When the matter was 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 appeal shall not be filed/pursued by the Page 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.506 of 2019 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 this appeal is less than the threshold limit. 3. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeal, wherein, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed, is dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in an appropriate case. No costs. (R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q., J.) 26.08.2022 r n s

Internet : Yes.

Index : Yes / No. Page 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.506 of 2019 R. MAHADEVAN, J. and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. r n s To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras 'SMC' Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-16, Chennai. 3. The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation-II, Chennai-34. T.C.A.No.506 of 2019 26.08.2022 Page 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis