TCA.No.277 of 2014 In High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 17.06.2020 Coram : Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and Honourable Mrs.Justice PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA Tax Case Appeal No.277 of 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Chennai. ...Appellant -vs- Sarita Bhandari, 20, Erulappan Street, Chennai-600079. PAN AADPB92 613 ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 against order dated 30.09.2010 made in I.T.A.No.591/Mds/2010 on file of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai, for assessment year 2003-04. For Appellant: Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel : assisted by Ms.K.G.Usha Rani, Junior Standing Counsel For Respondent: Mr.R.Sivakumar 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.277 of 2014 Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J. We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usha Rani, learned Junior Standing Counsel appearing for appellant Revenue and Mr.R.Sivakumar, learned counsel for respondent assessee. 2. This appeal, filed by Revenue under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against order dated 30.09.2010, made in I.T.A.No.591/Mds/2010 on file of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai, for assessment year 2003-04. 3. appeal was admitted on 18.08.2014, on following substantial questions of law : 1. Whether on facts and circumstances of case, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting addition of Rs.69,60,700/- made on account of unexplained receipt from sale of diamond? 2. Whether on facts and circumstances of case, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that addition made by Assessing Officer as unexplained receipts pertaining to sale of diamond under Section 68 of Income Tax Act is not proper? 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.277 of 2014 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 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. No costs. (T.S.S., J.) (P.S.N., J.) 17.06.2020 Internet: Yes To Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai. abr 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.277 of 2014 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J. abr TCA.No.277 of 2014 17.06.2020 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Chennai v. Sarita Bhandari