PRINCIPAL COMMISSONER OF vs. SMT.REMIBAI,

PDF · subscribers
TCA/331/2018HC Madras25 August 2022Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice R. MAHADEVAN4 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the substantial questions of law on merits. Instead, the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant/Revenue brought to the court's notice CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. This circular stipulates that appeals shall not be filed or pursued by the Department before the High Court if the tax effect does not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). The Revenue submitted that the tax effect in these appeals was less than this threshold limit. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the present appeals as withdrawn, in light of the submission regarding the tax effect being below the monetary limit. The court explicitly stated that the substantial questions of law were kept open for determination in appropriate cases. No costs were awarded, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I) filed five Tax Case Appeals (T.C.A.Nos.331 to 335 of 2018) before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. These appeals challenged a common order dated 30.04.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'A' Bench, Chennai. The appeals pertained to assessment years 2001-02 and 2004-05 to 2007-08. The ITAT's order had set aside the cases to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. The procedural history indicates that the assessee, Remibai, filed returns only after a search and in response to a notice under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act. The amount in dispute is not explicitly stated but is referred to as having a tax effect.

What were the issues?

The High Court was asked to decide the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the ITAT was correct in setting aside the case to the CIT(A) when the assessee had not filed her original Return of Income but only filed returns after a search and in response to a notice under Section 153C, which the Revenue contended was against Explanation 5(a) of Section 271(1)(C) of the Income Tax Act? 2. Whether the ITAT was correct in setting aside the matter to the CIT(A) without examining the facts and merits of the case, and when the assessee had not produced any material or evidence to prove her case? The Revenue argued that the ITAT's order was erroneous on both counts. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the assessee's side.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C,Section 271(1)(C),Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

T.C.A.Nos.331 to 335 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 25.08.2022 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Tax Case Appeal Nos.331 to 335 of 2018 AND C.M.P.Nos.6421, 6422, 6423 & 6424 of 2018 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I No.108, Mahatma Gnadhi Road Chennai 600 034

.. Appellant in all T.C.As Vs. Remibai 29A, Ganapathy Street Royapettah Chennai 600 014

PAN : AAE PR 6224 K .. Respondent in all T.C.As Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order dated 30.04.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai, in respective I.T.A.No.9/Mds/2014 to I.T.A.No.13/Mds/2014. For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan in all T.C.As Standing Counsel 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.331 to 335 of 2018 C O M M O N J U D G M E N T (Judgment was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.) These tax case appeals have been filed by the appellant/Revenue, calling in question the correctness of the common order dated 30.04.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai, in respective I.T.A.No.9/Mds/2014 to I.T.A.No.13/Mds/2014, for the assessment years 2001-02, 2004-05 to 2007-08, by raising the following substantial questions of law : “1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in setting aside the case to the CIT(A) when the assessee has not filed her Return of Income originally but only after the search and in response to the notice issued u/s.153C of the IT Act returns were filed which is against Explanation 5(a) of section 271(1)(C) of the Income Tax Act? 2. Whether the ITAT is correct in setting aside the matter to the CIT(A) without examining the facts and merits of the case and when the assessee has not produced any material or evidence to prove its case?” 2. When these matters were taken up for consideration, the learned Standing 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 appeals 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 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.331 to 335 of 2018 these appeals are less than the threshold limit. 3. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant/Revenue, the present appeals, wherein, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed, are dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in appropriate cases. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. [R.M.D,J.] [M.S.Q, J.] 25.08.2022

Index : Yes / No gya To 1.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle I(3), Chennai 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)(Central)-I Chennai 3.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai R. MAHADEVAN, J. AND 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.331 to 335 of 2018 MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. gya Tax Case Appeal Nos.331 to 335 of 2018 25.08.2022

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →