COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SRM SYSTEMS AND SOFTWARE
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted that the Revenue's counsel brought to its notice Circular No. 17/2019 dated August 8, 2019, issued by the CBDT. This circular stipulates that appeals shall not be filed or pursued by the Department before the High Court if the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. The counsel submitted that the tax effect in these appeals was less than this threshold limit. Consequently, the Court dismissed the present appeals as withdrawn, stating that the substantial questions of law remain open for determination in appropriate cases. No costs were awarded, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
What were the facts?
These are eight Tax Case Appeals (TCAs) filed by the Revenue against orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated November 18, 2014, and October 28, 2013. The appeals pertain to assessment years 1999-2000, 2000-01, and 2001-02. The ITAT had quashed assessment orders passed under Section 153C and Section 153BC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue is challenging the ITAT's findings regarding the satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Officer and the Tribunal's failure to adjudicate specific grounds raised by the Revenue. The appeals were filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
What were the issues?
The Tribunal had to decide the following substantial questions of law: TCA.Nos.1046 to 1049 of 2015: 1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in quashing assessment orders made under Section 153C without verifying the Assessing Officer's Satisfaction Note. 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in not dealing with grounds raised by the Revenue, contrary to the Madras High Court judgment in 263 ITR page 5. TCA.Nos.1066 to 1069 of 2015: 1. Whether the Tribunal was right in quashing assessment orders holding that the Assessing Officer had not recorded reasons before initiating proceedings under Section 153BC. 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that recording of reasons/satisfaction was not required under Section 153BC or the circular explaining the Finance Act 2003 provisions. 3. Whether the Tribunal was right in not dealing with grounds raised by the Revenue, contrary to the Madras High Court judgment in 263 ITR page 5. 4. Whether the Tribunal was justified in granting relief for Assessment Year 2005-06 on the ground of no satisfaction note under Section 153C, when Section 153C was not applicable to that year. Assessee's arguments are not recorded in the provided text. The Revenue argued that the Tribunal erred in quashing assessments without verifying satisfaction notes and in failing to adjudicate specific grounds raised by the Revenue. For TCA.Nos.1066 to 1069 of 2015, the Revenue also argued that the Tribunal wrongly held that reasons/satisfaction were not required under Section 153BC and that the Tribunal granted relief for AY 2005-06 based on an inapplicable section.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 153C,Section 153BC,Section 260A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
T.C.A.Nos.1046 to 1049 and 1066 to 1069 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 30.08.2022 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.Nos.1046 to 1049 and 1066 to 1069 of 2015 and M.P.Nos.1,1,1,1,1 and 1 of 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax Central I, 121, M.G.Road, Chennai 600 034. ... Appellant in all TCAs Versus M/s. SRM Systems and Software Pvt.Ltd., 120, G.N.Chetty Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017. PAN: AAB CS 5118 D ... Respondent in all TCAs Appeals preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 18.11.2014 and 28.10.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "B" Bench, Chennai, in MP.Nos.40, 41, 42 and 43/Mds/2014 and I.T.A.Nos.993, 994, 995 and 996/Mds/2013. For Appellant : Mr.J.Narayanaswamy
Senior Standing Counsel in all TCAs For Respondent : Mr.Baskar Page 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.1046 to 1049 and 1066 to 1069 of 2015 for Mr.N.Muthukumaran in all TCAs
COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) These tax case appeals have been filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the orders dated 18.11.2014 and 28.10.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "B" Bench, Chennai, in MP.Nos.40, 41, 42 and 43/Mds/2014 and I.T.A.Nos.993, 994, 995 and 996/Mds/2013, relating to the respective assessment years 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2000-01, 2001-02, 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2000-01 and 2001-02, by raising the following substantial questions of law: TCA.Nos.1046 to 1049 of 2015:- “(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in quashing the assessment orders made under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act without verifying the Satisfaction Note recorded by the Assessing Officer? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Tribunal was right in not dealing with the grounds raised by the revenue which is contrary to the judgment of the Madras High Court reported in 263 ITR page 5 wherein it had been held that specific grounds raised had to be adjudicated by Page 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.1046 to 1049 and 1066 to 1069 of 2015 the Tribunal? " TCA.Nos.1066 to 1069 of 2015:- “(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in quashing the assessment orders holding that the assessing officer has not recorded the reasons before initiating proceedings under Section 153BC of the Income Tax Act? (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right holding that recording of reasons/satisfaction which is neither mentioned in section 153BC of the Act nor in the circular explaining the new provisions introduced in the Finance Act 2003? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in NOT dealing with the grounds raised by the revenue which is contrary to the Judgment of the Madras High Court reported in 263 ITR page 5 wherein it had been held that specific grounds raised had to be adjudicated by the Tribunal? (iv) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, is the Tribunal justified in granting relief for Assessment year 2005- 06 on the ground that no satisfaction note was recorded under Section 153C, when Section 153C is not applicable to the impugned year?" 2. When the matters were taken up for consideration, the learned Page 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.1046 to 1049 and 1066 to 1069 of 2015 counsel for the appellant / Revenue brought to the notice of this court the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board Direct Taxes, wherein, it is stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). It is also submitted that the tax effect in these appeals is less than the threshold limit. 3. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeals, wherein, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed, are dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in appropriate cases. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. (R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q., J.) 30.08.2022
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No Page 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.1046 to 1049 and 1066 to 1069 of 2015 To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax Central I, 121, M.G.Road, Chennai 600 034. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Chennai. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- II, Chennai. Page 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.1046 to 1049 and 1066 to 1069 of 2015 R. MAHADEVAN, J. and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. av T.C.A.Nos.1046 to 1049 and 1066 to 1069 of 2015 30.08.2022 Page 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
More judgments on Section 153C
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 874/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ajay Singh, Kota vs DCIT, Central Circle, KotaITA 495/JPR/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Junagadh vs ITO Ward 1, JunagadhITA 837/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026