COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI KUSHAL CHAND

TCA.No.70 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25.01.2021 CORAM : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA Tax Case Appeal No.70 of 2021 Commissioner of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Ward 9(2), Chennai. ...Appellant Vs Shri Kushal Chand ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 28.08.2018 made in ITA.No.3008/Chny/2017 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench, for the assessment year 2013-14. For Appellant: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent: Mr.G.Baskar 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.70 of 2021 JUDGMENT (Delivered by

T.S.Sivagnanam,J

) 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 28.08.2018 made in ITA.No.3008/Chny/2017 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2013-14. 2. The Revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: "1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT erred in law in holding that the reference to Sec 50C was not warranted in this case, as reference to DVO is mandatory as per provisions of Sec 50C of the IT Act? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances and in law, the ITAT is correct in not taking into account the report of the DVO to whom it is 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.70 of 2021 referred at the request of the assessee as per the provisions of Sec 50C of the Act?" 3. We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Appellant – Revenue and Mr.G.Baskar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing 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 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.70 of 2021 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. (T.S.S.,J.) (R.N.M.,J.) 25.01.2021 Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking Judgment/Non speaking Judgment hvk 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.70 of 2021 To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench. 2. Commissioner of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Ward 9(2), Chennai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.70 of 2021 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND R.N.MANJULA,J hvk TCA.No.70 of 2021 25.01.2021 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/