COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. K.V.JAYARAMAN

PDF · subscribers
TCA/1020/2015HC Madras17 June 2020Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice T. S. SIVAGNANAM4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The dismissal was based on the submission made by the Revenue that the appeal was not being pursued due to a low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. This circular increased the monetary threshold for filing appeals before the High Court to Rs. 1 Crore, and the tax effect in this particular case was stated to be below this limit. Consequently, the substantial question of law framed at the time of admission was left open. The Court granted liberty to the Revenue to seek restoration of the appeal if the tax effect was found to be above the threshold limit, for a decision on merits. No costs were awarded.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax, filed an appeal before the High Court of Madras against an order dated 01.05.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No. 2203/Mds/2014. This order concerned the assessment year 2009-10 and related to the cancellation of a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ITAT had cancelled the penalty on the ground that there was no difference between the returned income and the assessed income. The appeal was admitted by the High Court on a substantial question of law concerning the correctness of the ITAT's decision.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in cancelling penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act by holding that there is no difference between the returned income and assessee income? (Question of law) The Revenue contended that the appeal was not being pursued due to the low tax effect, citing Circular No. 17/2019 of the CBDT which increased the monetary limit for appeals to the High Court to Rs. 1 Crore. The Revenue stated that the tax effect in this case was below this threshold. The Assessee did not record any arguments in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

TCA.No.1020 of 2015 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 17.06.2020 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA Tax Case Appeal No.1020 of 2015 Commissioner of Income tax, No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore. ...Appellant Vs Shri. K.V.Jayaraman, No.17, Sundaram Layout, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore-641 045. PAN: ADJ PV 7536 L ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 01.05.2015, made in I.T.A.No.2203/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2009-10. For Appellant: Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usha Rani, Junior Standing Counsel Respondent: Mr.L.Chandrakumar 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.1020 of 2015 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 the appellant–Revenue and Mr.L.Chandrakumar, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order order dated 01.05.2015, made in I.T.A.No.2203/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2009-10. 3. The appeal was admitted on 04.11.2015 on the following substantial question of law : “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in cancelling penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act by holding that there is no difference between the returned income and assessee income?” 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant submits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue on account of the low tax effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.8.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. By the said Circular, the monetary limit for filing or 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.1020 of 2015 pursuing an appeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above tax case appeal is dismissed on account of the low tax effect. The substantial question of law framed is left open. In the event the tax effect is above the threshold limit fixed in the said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. (T.S.S., J.) (P.S.N., J.) 17.06.2020 Internet: Yes abr To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai. 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.1020 of 2015 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J. abr TCA.No.1020 of 2015 17.06.2020 4/4 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 →