PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF vs. DOLLAR APPARELS

PDF · subscribers
TCA/365/2017HC Madras23 July 2021Bench: Honourable Mr Justice R. SURESH KUMAR4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the Tax Case Appeal filed by the Revenue. The dismissal was based on a submission by the learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue that the tax effect in the instant case was less than the monetary limit imposed by CBDT's Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of without adjudicating the substantial questions of law raised. The Court explicitly kept the substantial questions of law open for adjudication at an appropriate stage in the future. Therefore, there was no finding on the merits of the issues concerning the deduction under Section 80IA or the applicability of Section 80AB, nor was there any operative direction like deletion or granting of relief. The principle that can be cited from this judgment is that appeals with low tax effect, as per CBDT circulars, may be dismissed without deciding the merits, preserving the questions of law.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, filed a Tax Case Appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Madras, challenging an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT's order, dated 23.11.2016 in ITA.No.105/Mds/2016, concerned the assessment year(s) not explicitly stated but related to a deduction under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act for income from a windmill division. The ITAT had remitted the case back to the Assessing Officer for consideration of this deduction, subject to Section 80AB. The Revenue's appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. The procedural history indicates that the ITAT had previously passed an order in the assessee's own case for a subsequent assessment year (2013-14) that favored the Revenue on a similar issue.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide two substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in remitting the case to the Assessing Officer to consider the deduction under Section 80IA for income from the windmill division, subject to Section 80AB, when the Tribunal itself, in the assessee's own case for assessment year 2013-14, had allowed a similar appeal in favor of the Revenue. 2. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in remitting the case to the Assessing Officer to consider the deduction under Section 80IA for income from the windmill division, subject to Section 80AB, when the assessee's revised computation showed 'nil' business income, thereby raising a question on the eligibility for the deduction. The Revenue contended that the ITAT's order was contradictory to its own previous order for a subsequent assessment year and questioned the remission when the assessee's revised computation indicated no business income, which would negate the claim for deduction under Section 80IA. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 80IA,Section 80AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

T.C.A.No.365 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23.10.2024 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN Tax Case Appeal No.365 of 2017 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore. .... Appellant Vs. Dollar Apparels No.13 sixty Feet Road Kumaranandapuram Tirupur . PAN AAB FD 8592 K. .... Respondent ----- Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench Chennai, dated 23.11.2016 in ITA.No.105/Mds/2016. For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan Senior Standing Counsel J U D G M E N T (Delivered by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue calling in question the correctness of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai by raising the following substantial questions of law: 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.365 of 2017 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate Tribunal is justified in law in remitting the case to file of the assessing officer to consider the deduction u/s.80IA of the Income Tax Act in respect of income from windmill division subject to the provisions of Section 80AB, when the very same Tribunal vide order in ITA No.2040/Mds/2016 dated 21.10.2016 in assessee's own case on a similar issue for the subsequent assessment year 2013-14 allowed the appeal in favour of the Revenue? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in remitting the case to file of the AO to consider the deduction u/s.80IA of the Act in respect of income from windmill division subject to the provisions of the Section 80AB, when it is clear from the revised computation filed by the assessee that the business income of the assessee is 'nil' and hence deduction u/s.80IA of the Act arises?" 2. It is brought to our notice by the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant Revenue that in the instant case, as per the CBDT's Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the appeal can be disposed of, keeping the substantial questions of law raised in this appeal open for adjudication at a later point of 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.365 of 2017 time. 3. Recording the aforesaid submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant Revenue, this Tax Case Appeal is dismissed for low tax effect, keeping open the substantial questions of law for adjudication at appropriate stage. No costs. (R.S.K.,J.) (C.S.N.,J.) 23.10.2024 NCS : Yes/No

KST To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai. 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.365 of 2017 R.SURESH KUMAR, J. AND C.SARAVANAN, J. KST T.C.A.No.365 of 2017 23.10.2024 4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

More judgments on Section 80IA

All 1,796 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80IA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →