PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF vs. SHRI.T.S.R.KHANNAIYANN

PDF · subscribers
TCA/104/2018HC Madras01 July 2025Bench: Honourable The CHIEF JUSTICE4 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the counsel for the appellant (revenue) stated that the monetary limit involved in the appeal was below the limit prescribed in Circular No.09/2024, dated 17.09.2024, issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes. Consequently, the counsel had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The court was also informed that the withdrawal was solely due to the monetary limit and not a concession on the Department's stand. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs was made. The specific issue decided by the ITAT, or the merits of the case, were not discussed or decided by the High Court as the appeal was withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Coimbatore (the appellant/revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 28.10.2016 in ITA No.804/Mds/2016. The respondent is T.S.R. Khannaiyann. The appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The High Court of Judicature at Madras heard the matter. The counsel for the appellant stated that the monetary limit involved in the appeal was below the prescribed limit in Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024, and therefore, he had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The withdrawal was stated to be solely due to the monetary limit and not a concession on the Department's stand.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal, filed by the revenue, should be withdrawn due to being below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024? (Question of procedure/administrative policy) Assessee's Contention: Not applicable as the assessee did not argue any points on merits. The appeal was withdrawn by the revenue. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, stated that the monetary limit involved in the appeal was below the prescribed limit in Circular No.09/2024, and therefore, it had instructions to withdraw the appeal. The withdrawal was stated to be solely due to the monetary limit and without conceding the stand of the Department.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

TCA No.104 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 01.07.2025 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN TCA No.104 of 2018 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore. Appellant Vs T.S.R.Khannaiyann 67, Avaram Palayam Road, K.R.Puram, Coimbatore-641 018. Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench, Chennai, dated 28.10.2016 in ITA No.804/Mds/2016. For Appellant: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan Senior Standing Counsel __________ Page 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/07/2025 12:21:23 pm ) TCA No.104 of 2018 For Respondent: Ms.Vandhana Vyas for M/s.R.Sivaraman 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 No.09/2024, dated 17.09.2024, issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Government of India. 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. Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. (K.R.SHRIRAM, CJ.) (SUNDER MOHAN, J.)

01.07.2025 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No sasi __________ Page 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/07/2025 12:21:23 pm ) TCA No.104 of 2018 To: 1. The Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai Benches, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Coimbatore. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle-II, Coimbatore. __________ Page 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/07/2025 12:21:23 pm ) TCA No.104 of 2018 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND SUNDER MOHAN,J. (sasi)

TCA No.104 of 2018

01.07.2025 __________ Page 4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/07/2025 12:21:23 pm )

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →