COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI S.SARAVANANE

TCA.Nos.875 to 878 of 2015 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 27.08.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal Nos.875 to 878 of 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax, Puducherry, D.P. Thottam, Muthialpet, Puducherry - 605 003. ...Appellant in all the appeals Vs Shri S.Saravanane ...Respondent in TCA.Nos.875 to 877 of 2015 Shri.S.Anandavadivel ...Respondent in TCA.No.878 of 2015 APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order dated 05.08.2014 made in ITA.Nos.1125, 1126, 1127 and 1131/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment years 2003-04, 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, SC For Respondent : No appearance COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J) We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.875 to 878 of 2015 assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue. 2.These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are directed against the common order dated 05.08.2014 made in ITA.Nos.1125, 1126, 1127 and 1131/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment years 2003-04, 2003- 04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. 3.The appeals were admitted on 17.11.2015 on the following substantial questions of law : “1.Whether the Tribunal was right in law and justified by deleting the penalty levied under Sections 271D and under Section 271E of the Act, when the assessee regularly violated the provisions of Section 269SS and Section 269T of the Income Tax Act? 2.Whether the Tribunal was right in law accepting the version of the assessee without any evidence that he has not borrowed and repaid any loan from the lender, when the lender made categorical statement under oath that the assessee has borrowed and repaid loan in cash?” 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant submits that the above appeals are not pursued by the Revenue on account of the low tax 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.875 to 878 of 2015 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 the respective cases is less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above tax case appeals are dismissed on account of the low tax effect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open. In the event the tax effect in the respective cases 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 appeals to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. (T.S.S.J.) (V.B.S.J.) 27.08.2019 cse Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes (or) No To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench. 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.875 to 878 of 2015 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J. AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J. cse TCA.Nos.875 to 878 of 2015 27.08.2019 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in