THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-T vs. M/S.PREMIER SYNTHETIC INDUST

PDF · subscribers
TCA/1012/2019HC Madras12 December 2019Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice N. KIRUBAKARAN6 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the Tax Case Appeals filed by the Revenue. The dismissal was based on the ground of tax effect, as the tax involved in these appeals was less than Rs. 1 crore, which is the enhanced monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Court as per Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. The Court noted that the substantial question of law framed was left open. The Revenue was granted liberty to mention the case for restoration if the tax effect was found to be above the prescribed limit, to be heard and decided on merits. No costs were awarded.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed three Tax Case Appeals (TCA Nos. 1012 to 1014 of 2019) before the High Court of Judicature at Madras against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai 'D' Bench, dated 13.10.2006. These appeals pertained to assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89. The assessee, M/s. Premier Synthetic Industries, had appealed against assessment orders dated 31.03.1993. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had dismissed the assessee's appeals, upholding penalties under Section 271(1)(c) for assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89, and a penalty under Section 273(2)(c) for assessment year 1988-89. The ITAT, in its impugned order, dismissed appeals in ITA Nos. 1966 & 1968/Mds/2000 but allowed the appeal in ITA No. 1967/Mds/2000.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in deleting the penalty under Section 273(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, even though the assessee furnished statements understating profits for advance-tax purposes? Assessee's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued that the tax effect in these cases was less than Rs. 1 crore and therefore covered by Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the CBDT. This circular sets the monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Court at Rs. 1 crore. Consequently, the Revenue contended that these appeals should be dismissed on this ground.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 271(1)(c),Section 273(2)(a),Section 273(2)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

T.C.A.Nos.1012 to 1014 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 12.12.2019 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN T.C.A.Nos.1012 to 1014 of 2019 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Coimbatore. ... Appellant in all the appeals Vs M/s. Premier Synthetic Industries Premier House, 185 ATD Street, Race Course, Coimbatore – 18. ... Respondent in all the appeals Prayer in TCA No.1012 of 2019: Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “D” Bench, Chennai dated 13.10.2006 passed in ITA Nos. 1966/Mds/2000 for the assessment year 1987-88. Prayer in TCA No. 1013 of 2019:Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “D” Bench, Chennai dated 13.10.2006 passed in ITA Nos. 1967/Mds/2000 for the assessment year 1988-89. 1/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.1012 to 1014 of 2019 Prayer in TCA No. 1014 of 2019:Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “D” Bench, Chennai dated 13.10.2006 passed in ITA Nos. 1968/Mds/2000 for the assessment year 1988-89. For Appellant : Mr.T.R. Senthilkumar Senior Standing Counsel (in all the appeals) For Respondent : Mr.Venkat Narayanan for M/s. Subbarayan Aiyar Padmanabhan & Ramani (in all the appeals) C O M M O N J U D G M E N T (Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.KIRUBAKARAN, J) These Tax Case Appeals have been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 13.10.2006 passed in ITA.Nos.1966 to 1968/Mds/2000 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench for the assessment years 1987-88, 1988-89 & 1988-89 respectively. 2.As against the assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer dated 31.03.1993, the assessee preferred appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which came to be dismissed 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.1012 to 1014 of 2019 by order dated 04.09.2000 by upholding the penalties levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 pertaining to assessment years 1987-88 & 1988-89 as well as confirming the penalty levied under Section 273(2)(c) of the Act for the assessment year 1988-89. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai “D” Bench in I.T.A. Nos. 1966 to 1968/Mds/2000 and the Tribunal, by the order under challenge, while dismissing the appeals in I.T.A. Nos. 1966 & 1968/Mds/2000, allowed the appeal in I.T.A. No. 1967/Mds/2000. As against the same, the Revenue has filed the present appeals. 3.The appeals are admitted on the following substantial question of law : “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in deleting the penalty under Section 273(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, eventhough the assessee furnished the statements understating the profits for the purpose of advance-tax?” 4.Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the tax effect 3/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.1012 to 1014 of 2019 in these cases are less than Rs.1 crore and is covered by Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Director, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, Delhi. As per the said circular, the monetary limit to file an appeal before the High Court is fixed at Rs.1 crore. In these cases, tax effect is less than Rs.1 crore and therefore, these cases have to be dismissed. 5.This Court perused the circular dated 08.08.2019 and Paragraph No.2 of the said Circular, which prescribes monetary limit for filing appeal is usefully extracted as follows: 2.As a step towards further management of litigation, it has been decided by the Board that monetary limits for filing of appeals in income-tax cases be enhanced further through amendment in Para 3 of the Circular mentioned above and accordingly, the table for monetary limits specified in Para 3 of the Circular shall read as follows: S.No. Appeals / SLPs in Income- tax matters Monetary Limit (Rs.) 1. Before Appeallate Tribunal 50,00,000 2. Before High Court 1,00,00,000 4/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.1012 to 1014 of 2019 S.No. Appeals / SLPs in Income- tax matters Monetary Limit (Rs.) 3. Before Supreme Court 2,00,00,000 6.In view of the submissions made by the learned Senior Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and also in view of the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Director, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Delhi, these Tax Case Appeals are dismissed on account of tax effect. However, the substantial question of law framed is left open. In the event the tax effect is above the limit fixed in the said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appeals to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. (NKKJ) (PVJ) 12.12.2019 sai To 1.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Coimbatore. 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai “D” Bench. 5/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.1012 to 1014 of 2019 N.KIRUBAKARAN, J. and P.VELMURUGAN

, J.

sai T.C.A.Nos.1012 to 1014 of 2019 Dated : 12.12.2019 6/6 http://www.judis.nic.in

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →