COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-II, KOLKATA. vs. MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue on the ground of low tax effect, based on the submission made by the revenue's learned standing counsel. Consequently, the substantial questions of law, which were raised in the appeal, were left open and not decided on merits. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal. Any connected applications were also dismissed.
What were the facts?
This is an appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Calcutta. The appeal concerns McLeod Russel India Ltd. as the respondent/assessee. The revenue, represented by Mr. P.K. Bhowmik, submitted that the appeal could not be pursued due to a low tax effect. The High Court heard arguments from both the revenue and the assessee.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, can be pursued given the low tax effect. (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its learned standing counsel, submitted on instruction from the department that the appeal cannot be pursued on account of low tax effect.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
OD-1 ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITA/105/2009 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA – II, KOLKATA VS. MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM AND The Hon’ble JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : December 16, 2021. [Via Video Conference] Appearance: Mr. P.K. Bhowmik, Advocate Mr. Arunava Ganguly, Advocate … for the appellant Mr. Asim Choudhury, Advocate Mr. Soham Sen, Advocate Ms. A. Dey, Advocate … for the respondent The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ Bench, Calcutta. We have heard Mr. P.K. Bhowmik, learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue and Mr. Asim Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee.
2 The learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue on instruction from the department submitted that the appeal cannot be pursued by the revenue on account of low tax effect. Recording such submission, the appeal is dismissed on the ground of low tax effect. Consequently, substantial questions of law which have been raised are left open. Connected application, if any, stands dismissed. (T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) RS/GH.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Yadeshwar Mallekedi vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 15 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
