COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ALL INDIA SKIN & HIDE TANNERS

PDF · subscribers
TCA/186/2018HC Madras04 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 on the ground of low tax effect, citing CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. The circular enhances the monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Court to Rs.1 crore. As the tax effect in these appeals was less than this limit, the appeals were dismissed. However, the substantial questions of law framed were left open. The Revenue was granted liberty to mention the case to restore the appeals if the tax effect is found to be above the prescribed limit, for hearing and decision on merits. The Court did not decide the substantial questions of law on their merits.

What were the facts?

The Revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai) filed three appeals (T.C.A.Nos.186 to 188 of 2018) before the High Court of Judicature at Madras against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Madras 'B' Bench, dated 23.09.2016. These appeals challenged the ITAT's decision in ITA.No.1240 to 1242/Mds/2016 for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13. The ITAT had dismissed the Revenue's appeals against the orders of the CIT(A), which had rejected the Revenue's pleas. The CIT(A)'s orders were passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

The High Court admitted the appeals on three substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the ITAT was right in holding that the assessee society is eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, disregarding the facts and the newly inserted provisos to Section 2(15). 2. Whether the ITAT was right in holding that the assessee's activities are governed by the "principles of mutuality," despite the society being registered under Section 12AA as a "charitable entity," and in light of the Kerala High Court's decision in M/s.Investors Club Trichur vs. CIT, which held that a "charitable institution" cannot claim "mutuality." 3. Whether the ITAT's order was against the principle of "judicial consistency" by disregarding its earlier order in ITA No.2749, 2750 and 2751/Mds/1994 for A.Ys.1998-99, 1990-91 & 1991-92, which had held the assessee's activities to be for "advancement of objects of general public utility" and had reached finality. The Revenue argued that the tax effect in these cases is less than Rs.1 crore and is covered by CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019, which sets the monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Court at Rs.1 crore. Therefore, the appeals should be dismissed. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 11,Section 2(15),Section 12AA,Section 143(3),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

T.C.A.Nos.186 to 188 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 04.12.2019 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN T.C.A.Nos.186 to 188 of 2018 and C.M.P.Nos.3200 & 3201 of 2018 Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ... Appellant (in all the appeals) Vs M/s.All India Skin & Hide Tanners & Merchants Association, 43/53, Raja Muthiah Road, Periamet, Chennai 600 003. PAN: AAATA0492J ... Respondent (in all the appeals) PRAYER in TCA.No.186 of 2018: Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B” Bench, dated 23.09.2016 passed in ITA.No.1240/Mds/2016. PRAYER in TCA.No.187 of 2018: Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B” Bench, dated 23.09.2016 passed in ITA.No.1241/Mds/2016. 1/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.186 to 188 of 2018 PRAYER in TCA.No.188 of 2018: Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B” Bench, dated 23.09.2016 passed in ITA.No.1242/Mds/2016. For Appellant :Mr.J.Narayanaswamy (in all the appeals) Senior standing counsel 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 23.09.2016 passed in ITA.No.1240 to 1242/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13. 2.The impugned order is filed by the Revenue aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), dated 29.01.2016 in ITA Nos.37, 38 & 11/CIT (A)-17/13-14/14-15/15-16 under Section 143(3) r.w.s 250 (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, where the Tribunal rejected the plea of the Revenue and dismissed the Appeals. 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.186 to 188 of 2018 3.These Appeals are admitted on the following substantial question of law : “(i)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in holding that the Society is eligible for exemption u/s.11 of the I.T.Act, in complete disregard to the facts of the case and the provisions of newly inserted provisos of Section 2(15) of the I.T. Act? (ii)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in holding that the activities of the assessee society are governed under “principles of mutuality” even though the Society is registered u/s.12AA of the Income Tax Act as a “charitable entity” and has been claiming that status all along, more so when Kerala High Court in the case of M/s.Investors Club Trichur vs. CIT 318 ITR 427 (Ker.) has clearly held that a “charitable institution” cannot raise the “plea of mutuality”? (iii)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order of the Hon'ble ITAT was not against principle of “judicial consistency” in as much as it was passed in disregard of the findings of its earlier order in ITA No.2749, 2750 and 2751/Mds/1994 for A.Ys.1998-99, 1990-91 & 1991-92, where a clear finding had been given that the assessee's activities are in the nature of 3/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.186 to 188 of 2018 “advancement of objects of general public utility” and such decision had already reached finality?"

4.Mr.J.Narayanaswamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the tax effect 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 4/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.186 to 188 of 2018 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 3. Before Supreme Court 2,00,00,000 6.In view of the submissions made by the learned 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 questions 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. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. (NKKJ) (PVJ) 04.12.2019 sai 5/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.186 to 188 of 2018 N.KIRUBAKARAN, J. and P.VELMURUGAN

, J.

sai To 1.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. 2.Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai. T.C.A.Nos.186 to 188 of 2018 Dated : 04.12.2019 6/6 http://www.judis.nic.in

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →