PRINCIPAL COMMISIONER OF INC vs. S.RAJARATHINAM

TCA/24/2020HC Madras24 August 2022Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice R. MAHADEVAN4 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The dismissal was based on the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue regarding CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. This circular mandates that appeals shall not be filed or pursued by the Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. Since the tax effect in the present appeal was stated to be less than this monetary limit, the appeal was disposed of as withdrawn. The Court explicitly stated that the substantial question of law was kept open for determination in an appropriate case. No costs were awarded.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated December 17, 2018, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Madras 'A' Bench. The appeal pertained to assessment year 2012-13 and concerned the issue of cessation of liabilities. The ITAT had followed its own decision in the case of the assessee's brother, Shri S. Yogarathnam, and confirmed the deletion of an addition made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee, Shri S. Rajarathinam, did not appear before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in observing that it followed its own decision in the case of the assessee's brother, Shri S. Yogarathnam, on the issue of cessation of liabilities, and in para 7, confirmed the action of the learned CIT(A) in deleting the addition instead of remitting the issue to the Assessing Officer? (Question of law/mixed law and fact, concerning the ITAT's order and its application of precedent). Assessee's contentions: Not recorded. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue brought to the notice of the High Court Circular No. 17/2019 issued by the CBDT, which stipulates that appeals shall not be filed or pursued if the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. The Revenue submitted that the tax effect in this appeal is less than the threshold limit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

T.C.A.No.24 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 24.08.2022 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.No.24 of 2020 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central-I, No.108, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai - 600 034. ... Appellant Versus Shri S.Rajarathinam, 10, Laxmanan Street, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017. ... Respondent (PAN No.ACX PR 0997 A) Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “A” Bench, dated 17.12.2018 in I.TA.No.1458/Chny/2016. For Appellant : Mr.J.Narayanaswamy Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : No appearance Page 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.24 of 2020 J U D G M E N T (Judgment was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the order dated 17.12.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench in I.T.A.No.1458/Chny/2016, relating to the assessment year 2012-13, by raising the following substantial question of law:- "Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in observing in para 6 of its order that it follows its own decision in the case of the assessee's brother, Shri.S.Yogarathnam (ITA Nos.985 to 988, 1037 & 1038/Mds/2016, dated 15.03.2017), on the issue of cessation of liabilities, whereas in para 7, it had confirmed the action of the learned CIT(A) in deleting the addition, instead of remitting the impugned issue to the file of the Assessing Officer? " 2. When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned 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 appeal 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 this appeal is less than the threshold limit. Page 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.24 of 2020 3. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeal, wherein, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed, is dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial question of law for determination in an appropriate case. No costs. (R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q., J.) 24.08.2022 r n s

Internet : Yes.

Index : Yes / No. Page 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.24 of 2020 R. MAHADEVAN, J. and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. r n s To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras 'A' Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) 18, Chennai. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cewntral Circle IV (2), Chennai. T.C.A.No.24 of 2020 24.08.2022 Page 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →