THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. M/S MURASOLIMARAN FAMILY TRU

T.C.A.No.424 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 17.08.2022 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Tax Case Appeal No.424 of 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai

.. Appellant Vs. M/s.Murasoli Maran Family Trust No.4, II Avenue, Boat Club Road R.A.Puram, Chennai 600 028 PAN : AAA TM0863H .. Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 31.01.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.2663/Mds/2016. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar

Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Ms.N.Sneha for Mr.J.Ravindran 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.424 of 2018 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, calling in question the correctness of the order dated 31.01.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.2663/Mds/2016, relating to the assessment year 2005-06, by raising the following substantial questions of law : “1. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the benefit u/s.161 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is to be allowed especially when the Trust has supposedly ceased to exists? 2. Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad especially when the Trust is to be assessed as AOP at the maximum marginal rate as provided u/s.167 of the Income Tax Act when only one Trustee was available and two beneficiaries who attended the meeting had passed a resolution which is invalid based on which no benefits can be granted? 3. Whether the reasoning and finding of the Tribunal is proper by holding that 3 trustees were present on the date of passing of the resolution which fact is factually incorrect and wrong and is contrary to the covenants in the Trust Deed which clearly indicated that the 2 trustees who were on record alone 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.424 of 2018 were capable of passing valid resolutions and since only one trustee attended the meeting when the resolutions were passed they could not acted upon and therefore were invalid?” 2. When the matter was 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 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. 3. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned Standing 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 questions of law for determination in an appropriate case. No costs. [R.M.D,J.] [M.S.Q, J.] 17.08.2022 Internet : Yes

gya 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.424 of 2018 R. MAHADEVAN, J. AND MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. gya To 1.The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai 2.The Income Tax Officer Business Ward XV(4) Chennai 600 034 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2 Chennai 4.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai Tax Case Appeal No.424 of 2018 17.08.2022 (1/2) 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis