PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 vs. THILLAIKARASI

TCA/1/2020HC Madras19 June 2025Bench: Honourable The CHIEF JUSTICE4 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, upon being informed by the counsel for the Revenue that the monetary limit involved in the appeal was below the prescribed limit in Circular F.No.390/Misc/30/2023-JC, dated 02.11.2023, and that he had instructions to withdraw the appeal, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The Court noted that the withdrawal was solely due to the monetary limit and without conceding the stand of the Department. No decision on the merits of the original appeal was made. The Court also directed that CMP No.600 of 2020, pertaining to Sales Tax, be placed before the appropriate Bench. There was no order as to costs.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Coimbatore (the Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “D” Bench, Chennai, dated 10.05.2019 in I.T.A.No.3204/Chny/2018. The assessee is Thillaikarasi. The appeal was presented before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. The counsel for the Revenue stated that the monetary limit involved in the appeal was below the prescribed limit in Circular F.No.390/Misc/30/2023-JC, dated 02.11.2023, and that he had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The withdrawal was stated to be solely due to the monetary limit and without conceding the Department's stand.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is to be dismissed as withdrawn, considering the stated monetary limit and instructions from the Department? (Question of procedure/fact) The Revenue's contention, as presented by its counsel, was that the monetary limit involved in the appeal was below the prescribed limit in Circular F.No.390/Misc/30/2023-JC, dated 02.11.2023, and therefore, the appeal was being withdrawn. The withdrawal was explicitly stated to be without conceding the stand of the Department. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the assessee's side regarding this procedural withdrawal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

TCA No.1 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19.06.2025 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN TCA No.1 of 2020 and CMP No.600 2020 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore. : Appellant versus Thillaikarasi : Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “D” Bench, Chennai, dated 10.05.2019 in I.T.A.No.3204/Chny/2018. For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan Page 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm ) TCA No.1 of 2020 JUDGMENT (Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Mr.Karthik Ranganathan states that the monetary limit involved in this appeal is below the monetary limit prescribed in Circular F.No.390/Misc/30/2023-JC, dated 02.11.2023. Counsel says that he has instructions, therefore, to withdraw the appeal. 2. Counsel also states that the withdrawal is only due to the monetary limit and without conceding the stand of the Department. 3. The Appeals is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. 4. Since CMP No.600 of 2020 pertains to Sales Tax, the same be placed before the appropriate Bench. (K.R.SHRIRAM, CJ.) (SUNDER MOHAN, J.) 19.06.2025 Index : Yes/No tar To Page 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm ) TCA No.1 of 2020 1.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore. 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “D” Bench, Chennai Page 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm ) TCA No.1 of 2020 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND SUNDER MOHAN

, J.

(tar) TCA No.1 of 2020 19.06.2025 Page 4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →