TCA.No.850 of 2017 In High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 16.6.2020 Coram : Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and Honourable Mrs.Justice PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA Tax Case Appeal No.850 of 2017 Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai ...Appellant Vs M/s.Royal Splendours Developers Pvt. Ltd., Chennai-32. ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 against order dated 16.2.2017 made in ITA.No.768/Mds/2016 on file of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench for assessment year 2009-10. For Appellant: Mr.T.Ravikumar, SSC & Mrs.R.Hemalatha, SSC For Respondent: Not ready in notice Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J We have heard Mr.T.Ravikumar and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for appellant Revenue. 1/5 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.850 of 2017 2. This appeal, filed by Revenue under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, Act) is directed against order dated 16.2.2017 made in ITA.No.768/Mds/2016 on file of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench (for brevity, Tribunal) for assessment year 2009-10. 3. appeal has been admitted on 20.2.2018 on following substantial questions of law : 1. Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, Tribunal was right in law in holding that reassessment proceeding is bad in law since reason recorded for reopening of assessment was not furnished to Assessee before completion of reassessment? 2. Is not finding of Tribunal bad by quashing reassessment made by AO especially when facts remains that assessee did not object to non furnishing of reasons during reassessment proceedings and had also participated in it? 3. Whether reasoning and finding of Tribunal is proper especially when Hon'ble High Court of Madras in case of Areava T & D Ltd - 294 ITR 233 has held that in similar case that action of AO in completing reassessment without disposing off objections 2/5 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.850 of 2017 filed by Assessee to notice issued u/s.148 and non issuance of statutory notice u/s.143(2) was only procedural lapse / irregularity which would not make reassessment as nullity and matter was to be remanded back to AO for disposal afresh in accordance with law? and 4. Whether Tribunal was right in quashing reassessment order especially when Administrative action is found to be suffering only from breach of principle of natural justice then decision making process should be placed at stage where defect is detected rather than to permanently annul action of authority?" 4. learned Senior Standing Counsel for appellant submits that above appeal is not pursued by Revenue on account of low tax effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.8.2019 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes. By said Circular, monetary limit for filing or pursuing appeal before High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that tax effect in this case is less than threshold limit. 5. In light of said submissions, above tax case appeal is dismissed on account of low tax effect. substantial questions of law framed are left open. In event tax effect is above threshold limit 3/5 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.850 of 2017 fixed in said circular, liberty is granted to Revenue to make mention to this Court to restore appeal to be heard and decided on merits. 16.6.2020 To Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench. RS 4/5 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.850 of 2017 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J RS TCA.No.850 of 2017 16.6.2020 5/5 http://www.judis.nic.in Commissioner of Income-tax, Chennai v. Royal Splendours Developers Pvt. Ltd