Judgt. dt. 8.1.2020 in T.C.1482/2008, etc. CIT v. Estate of Late Balu Bai Dadha 1/6 IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 8.1.2020 CORAM HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR Tax Case Nos.1482 to 1487 and 937 of 2008 Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai Appellant in all cases Vs. Estate of Late Balu Bai Dadha, by Executor S.Mohanchand Dadha 268, Loyds Road, Chennai 600 014. Respondent in TC 1482/2008 Shri.Pradeep Dadha Respondent in TC 1483/2008 Smt.Kanta Kavar Dadha Respondent in TC 1484/2008 Subhagmal Mohanchand Dadha (HUF), 268, Loyds Road, Chennai 600 014. Respondent in TC 1485/2008 Shri.M.Meherchand Dadha Respondent in TC 1486 & 1487 of 2008 Shri.S.Mohanchand Dadha (HUF), M/s.Kumbahat & Co.C.A.'s, 144, N.S.C.Bose Road, Chennai-79. Respondent in TC 937/2008 Tax Cases filed under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 against order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, http://www.judis.nic.in Judgt. dt. 8.1.2020 in T.C.1482/2008, etc. CIT v. Estate of Late Balu Bai Dadha 2/6 Chennai, dated 16.11.2007 in ITA Nos.172/Mds/2005, 173/Mds/2005, 174/Mds/2005, 177/Mds/2005, 176/Mds/2005, 180/Mds/2005 and 178/Mds/2005. For Appellant : Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani Standing Counsel For Respondents : Mr.T.Pramodkumar Chopda COMMON JUDGMENT (Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J) These Tax Cases have been filed by Revenue, calling in question correctness of order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai, dated 16.11.2007 in ITA Nos.172/Mds/2005, 173/Mds/2005, 174/Mds/2005, 177/Mds/2005, 176/Mds/2005, 180/Mds/2005 and 178/Mds/2005, for Block Period 1.4.1988 to 15.12.1998, by raising following substantial questions of law: "T.C.Nos.1482 to 1485 of 2008 i) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, Tribunal was right in holding that since amalgamation is reality, amounts received by assessee from amalgamated company from even before amalgamation cannot be brought to tax? ii) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, http://www.judis.nic.in Judgt. dt. 8.1.2020 in T.C.1482/2008, etc. CIT v. Estate of Late Balu Bai Dadha 3/6 Tribunal was right in holding that interest on amounts agreed to be paid by amalgamated company cannot be brought to tax? T.C.No.1486 & 1487 of 2008 i) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, Tribunal was right in holding that block assessment order passed under section 158BC in assessee's case is bad in law as material seized was not books of account or other documents but loose sheets of paper? ii) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, Tribunal was right in holding that since amalgamation is reality, amounts received by assessee from amalgamated company from even before amalgamation cannot be brought to tax? iii) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, Tribunal was right in holding that interest on amounts agreed to be paid by amalgamated company cannot be brought to tax? iv) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting addition http://www.judis.nic.in Judgt. dt. 8.1.2020 in T.C.1482/2008, etc. CIT v. Estate of Late Balu Bai Dadha 4/6 made by assessing officer on account of undisclosed income? T.C.No.937 of 2008 i) Whether on facts and circumstances of case, Tribunal was right in holding that assessee as share holder of TDPL had not received any cash consideration for accepting merger of TDPL with SPIL? ii) Whether on facts and circumstances of case, Tribunal was right in holding that interest paid by SPIL to assessee for period from 1.7.1997 till date of search cannot be brought to tax?" 2. When matters are taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel brought to our notice Circular instruction issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No.17/2019 dated 8th August 2019, wherein, it is stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by Department before High Court in cases where tax effect does not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). 3. In instant cases, tax effect is said to be less than monetary limit imposed and therefore, Appeals filed by http://www.judis.nic.in Judgt. dt. 8.1.2020 in T.C.1482/2008, etc. CIT v. Estate of Late Balu Bai Dadha 5/6 Revenue are dismissed, as withdrawn, keeping open substantial questions of law for determination in appropriate cases. No costs. (V.K.,J.) (R.S.K.,J.) 8.1.2020 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No ssk. To 1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai. 2. Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai. 3. Estate of Late Balu Bai Dadha, by Executor S.Mohanchand Dadha 268, Loyds Road, Chennai 600 014. 4. Subhagmal Mohanchand Dadha (HUF), 268, Loyds Road, Chennai 600 014. 5. Shri.S.Mohanchand Dadha (HUF), M/s.Kumbahat & Co.C.A.'s, 144, N.S.C.Bose Road, Chennai-79. http://www.judis.nic.in Judgt. dt. 8.1.2020 in T.C.1482/2008, etc. CIT v. Estate of Late Balu Bai Dadha 6/6 DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J. and R.SURESH KUMAR, J. ssk. TC Nos.1482 to 1487 and 937 of 2008 8.1.2020. http://www.judis.nic.in Commissioner of Income-tax, Chennai v. Estate of Late Balu Bai Dadha