Commissioner of Income Tax vs. G.RUSHKIN ROY

TCA/289/2022HC Madras01 July 2025Bench: Honourable The CHIEF JUSTICE4 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted the submission of the Revenue's counsel regarding the monetary limit of the appeal being below the prescribed threshold as per Circular F.No.390/Misc/30/2023-JC, dated 02.11.2023. Consequently, the counsel, on instructions, sought to withdraw the appeal. The Court accepted this submission and accordingly dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The withdrawal was explicitly stated to be without conceding the stand of the Department. No specific issue was decided on merits, and no operative directions were issued beyond dismissing the appeal as withdrawn. The Court also stated that there would be no order as to costs.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward III, Nagercoil (the Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “D” Bench, Chennai, dated 08.06.2022 in I.T.A.866/Chny/2020. The respondent in the appeal was G.Rushkin Roy (the assessee). The appeal was heard by the High Court of Judicature at Madras.

What were the issues?

The High Court was to decide the appeal filed by the Revenue. The Revenue's counsel, Mr. Narayanasamy, stated that the monetary limit involved in the appeal was below the limit prescribed in Circular F.No.390/Misc/30/2023-JC, dated 02.11.2023. Based on instructions, the counsel sought to withdraw the appeal. The Revenue's withdrawal was stated to be solely due to the monetary limit and without conceding the Department's stand.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

TCA No.289 of 2022 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.289 of 2022 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward III, Nagercoil : Appellant versus G.Rushkin Roy : Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “D” Bench, Chennai, dated 08.06.2022 in I.T.A.866/Chny/2020. For Appellant : Mr.J.Narayanasamy, Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Ms.Vandhana Vyas, for Mr.R.Sivaraman Page 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/07/2025 07:42:42 pm ) TCA No.289 of 2022 JUDGMENT (Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Mr.Narayanasamy states that the monetary limit involved in this appeal is below the monetary limit prescribed in Circular F.No.390/Misc/30/2023-JC, dated 02.11.2023. 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. 3. The Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. There will be no order as to costs. (K.R.SHRIRAM, CJ.) (SUNDER MOHAN, J.) 01.07.2025 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No tar Page 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/07/2025 07:42:42 pm ) TCA No.289 of 2022 To 1.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward III, Nagercoil 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “D” Bench, Chennai Page 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/07/2025 07:42:42 pm ) TCA No.289 of 2022 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND SUNDER MOHAN

, J.

(tar) TCA No.289 of 2022 01.07.2025 Page 4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/07/2025 07:42:42 pm )

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →