COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S DEVARAJ & OTHERS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue on account of low tax effect, in light of the submissions made by the Revenue's counsel and CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. The substantial question of law framed by the Revenue was left open. The Court granted liberty to the Revenue to mention the case for restoration if the tax effect is found to be above the threshold limit fixed in the circular, to be heard and decided on merits. No costs were awarded. The specific finding of the ITAT regarding the estimation of income at 5% of total turnover was not adjudicated upon by the High Court.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 21.09.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai 'A' Bench. The appeal pertained to the Block Period 01.04.1986 to 13.02.1996. The assessee is M/s. Devaraj & others. The High Court heard arguments from both the Revenue and the assessee. The Revenue's counsel submitted that the appeal was not being pursued due to low tax effect, citing CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 which increased the monetary limit for appeals to the High Court to Rs. 1 Crore. The tax effect in this case was stated to be below this threshold.
What were the issues?
1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in directing the Assessing Officer to estimate the income at 5% of the total turnover, when the income had not been estimated by the Assessing Officer at 8% as assumed by the ITAT, and whether there was any case for estimating the income at such a low rate? (Question of law and fact, concerning estimation of income). Contentions: Assessee: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue: The appeal is not being pursued due to low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, where the tax effect is less than the increased threshold limit of Rs. 1 Crore for appeals to the High Court.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
TCA.No.114 of 2015 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 27.08.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.114 of 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle I, Chennai. ...Appellant Vs M/s.Devaraj & others 688, Trunk Road, Poonthamallee, Chennai - 600 056. ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 21.09.2011 made in IT(SS).No.82/MDS/2006 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench for the Block Period 01.04.1986 to 13.02.1996. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, SSC and Ms.K.G.Usharani For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman for Mr.S.Sridhar JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J.) We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel, and Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.114 of 2015 and Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel for Mr.S.Sridhar, learned counsel appearing 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 dated 21.09.2011 made in IT(SS).No.82/MDS/2006 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench for the Block Period 01.04.1986 to 13.02.1996. 3.The appeal has been filed by raising 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 directing the Assessing Officer to estimate the income at 5% of the total turnover when the income has not been estimated by the Assessing Officer at 8% as assumed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and there is no case for estimating the income at such a low rate?" 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 pursuing an appeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore. It 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.114 of 2015 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.) (V.B.S.J.) 27.08.2019 cse Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes (or) No To 1.M/s.Devaraj & others 688, Trunk Road, Poonthamallee, Chennai - 600 056. 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench. 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.No.114 of 2015 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J. AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J. cse TCA.No.114 of 2015 27.08.2019 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026