Judgt. dt. 4.6.2020 in T.C.A.719 & 720/2016 CIT v. P.Madan Mohan 1/4 IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 4.6.2020 CORAM HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.719 & 720 of 2016 Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai. Appellant in both cases Vs. Shri.P.Madan Mohan PAN: AGZPM4775H Respondent in TCA 719/2016 Shri.A.P.Rajmohan PAN: AJJPR0649A Respondent in TCA 720/2016 Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 against order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai, dated 15.5.2015 made in ITA No.1493/Mds/2013 & 1495/Mds/2013. For Appellant :Mr.T.Ravikumar, Senior Standing Counsel For Respondents : Mr.Vijayaraghavan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan COMMON JUDGMENT (Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J) These Tax Case Appeals have been filed by Revenue, calling in question correctness of order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai, dated 15.5.2015 made in ITA http://www.judis.nic.in Judgt. dt. 4.6.2020 in T.C.A.719 & 720/2016 CIT v. P.Madan Mohan 2/4 No.1493/Mds/2013 & 1495/Mds/2013, for Assessment Year 2009- 1020, by raising following substantial questions of law: "(i) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, Tribunal was right in law in holding that Capital Gains is to be assessed in Assessment Year 2007-08 and not in Assessment Year 2009-2010? (ii) Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, Tribunal was correct in holding date of conclusion of agreement for joint development of land constitutes date of transfer? (iii) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, Tribunal was right in holding that assessees are eligible for exemption u/s.54F even though multiple flats were allotted to them in lieu of cost of 60% of land allotted to builder? (iv) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, Tribunal was correct in treating investment in multiple residential units located at different floors, different areas and different buildings and in different wings of same building as being eligible for deduction http://www.judis.nic.in Judgt. dt. 4.6.2020 in T.C.A.719 & 720/2016 CIT v. P.Madan Mohan 3/4 u/s.54F though as per provision, investment in residential unit alone is eligible for exemption?" 2. When matters are taken up for hearing, learned Senior 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 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.) 4.6.2020 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No ssk. To 1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai. http://www.judis.nic.in Judgt. dt. 4.6.2020 in T.C.A.719 & 720/2016 CIT v. P.Madan Mohan 4/4 DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J. and R.SURESH KUMAR, J. ssk. 2. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai. 3. Income Tax Officer, Business Ward V(2), Chennai 600 034. 4. Income Tax Officer, Salary Ward V(4), Chennai 600 034. T.C.(A) Nos.719 & 720 of 2016 4.6.2020. http://www.judis.nic.in Commissioner of Income-tax Chennai v. P. Madan Mohan