COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S DIAMOND SHIPPING AGENCIES
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn on account of the low tax effect, as indicated by the Revenue's submission and the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. The court noted that the tax effect was below the threshold limit for pursuing appeals before the High Court. The substantial question of law framed at the time of admission was expressly left undecided. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to seek restoration of the appeal if the tax effect was found to be above the threshold limit, to be heard and decided on merits. No costs were imposed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward-I, Tuticorin, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, dated November 25, 2016. The appeal pertained to Assessment Year 2013-14 and concerned M/s. Diamond Shipping Agencies Private Limited. The appeal was admitted on July 11, 2017, based on a substantial question of law. Subsequently, the Revenue sought to withdraw the appeal, citing a CBDT Circular regarding low tax effect. The tax effect in this case was stated to be below the revised threshold limit for pursuing appeals before the High Court.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the container freight station constitutes an “Inland Port” and is entitled to deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? The Revenue argued that the appeal was not being pursued due to low tax effect, referencing CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, which increased the monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Court to Rs. 1 crore. The Revenue contended that the tax effect in this case was below this threshold. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee regarding the merits of the substantial question of law.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
T.C.A.No.309 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 24.03.2021 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI T.C.A.No.309 of 2017 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward – I, Tuticorin. ... Appellant Vs. M/s.Diamond Shipping Agencies Private Limited, A-4, Diamond House, World Trade Avenue, Harbour Estate, Tuticorin – 628 004. ... Respondent Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, "A" Bench, dated 25.11.2016 in I.TA.No.2432/Mds/2016 Assessment Year 2013-14. For Appellant : Ms.V.Pushpa, Standing Counsel For Respondent : Ms.Sriniranjani Srinivasan Page 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.309 of 2017 JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.) We have heard Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Ms.Sriniranjani Srinivasan, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. 2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed against the order dated 25.11.2016 made in I.TA.No.2432/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, "A" Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2013-14. 3.The appeal was admitted on 11.07.2017 on the following substantial question of law: “Whether the container freight station constitutes an “Inland Port” and entitled to deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” Page 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.309 of 2017 4.The learned 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 08.08.2019 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 is further submitted that the tax effect in these cases are less than the threshold limit. 5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax Case Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low Tax Effect. The substantial question of law framed is left open. In the event the tax effect in this case 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.
Index : Yes/No [M.D., J.] [T.V.T.S., J.] Internet : Yes 24.03.2021 va Page 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.309 of 2017 M.DURAISWAMY, J. and T.V.THAMILSELVI, J. va To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, "A" Bench T.C.A.No.309 of 2017 24.03.2021 Page 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
More judgments on Section 80IA(4)
- Bombay Highway Carriers Private Limited… vs ITO Ward 5 (1), DelhiITA 6863/DEL/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed22 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
- Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central… vs Megha Engineering Infrastructures Limited…ITA 6273/DEL/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Cicago Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs ACIT, Circle 1(1), KolkataITA 994/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: Heard1 Sept 2026AY 2018-2019
- Gl Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai vs Circle 1(3)(1), MumbaiITA 2429/MUM/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Jul 2026AY 2024-25
- Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs M/S. Gharpure Engineering & Construction P…ITA 1042/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: Disposed18 Jun 2026AY 2009-10
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026