THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI T.CHITTY BABU

PDF · subscribers
TCA/442/2016HC Madras2026/MHC/422713 October 2026Bench: Honourable Dr.Justice ANITA SUMANTH2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court recorded the submission made by the Revenue's Senior Standing Counsel that the Income-Tax Department did not wish to pursue the appeal for assessment year 2008-09. The reason cited for this withdrawal was the low tax effect, in accordance with Circular No. 9 of 2024. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the Tax Case (Appeal) as withdrawn. The Court explicitly stated that the questions of law were left open to be decided in an appropriate future matter. No costs were awarded. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai (the Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Madras ‘C’ Bench, Chennai. The appeal pertains to assessment year 2008-09 and challenges the ITAT's order passed in ITA No. 1339/Mds/2012. The assessee is Shri T. Chitty Babu. The High Court of Judicature at Madras is hearing the appeal under Section 260-A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue, through its Senior Standing Counsel, informed the Court that it did not wish to pursue the appeal for the specified assessment year.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be entertained. The Revenue's contention was that it did not wish to pursue the appeal for assessment year 2008-09. This decision was based on Circular No. 9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024, citing low tax effect as the reason for withdrawal. The judgment does not explicitly frame questions of law that the Tribunal had to decide, nor does it record any arguments from the assessee's side regarding the merits of the case. The entire focus of the High Court's decision was on the Revenue's submission to withdraw the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

2026:MHC:4227 TCA No. 442 of 2016 __________ Page 1 of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-10-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR TCA No. 442 of 2016 CNR:{HCMA010951552016} The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai. ..Appellant(s) Vs Shri T.Chitty Babu 46 G.Square, OMR Kandhanchavadi, Chennai 600 096 ..Respondent(s) Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras ‘C’ Bench, Chennai dated 22.5.2015 passed in ITA No. 1339/Mds/2012 for assessment year 2008 – 09. For Appellant(s): Mr.T.Ravi Kumar Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent(s): Mr.A.S.Sriraman https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2026 01:01:40 pm ) 2026:MHC:4227 TCA No. 442 of 2016 __________ Page 2 of 2 DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J. AND K.RAJASEKAR, J. Judgment (Delivered by Dr.Anita Sumanth, J.) Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel, appearing for the appellant / Department would submit that the Income-Tax Department does not wish to pursue this appeal qua assessment year 2008 – 09 and seeks withdrawal of the same on account of low tax effect, per Circular bearing No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024. 2. Recording the aforesaid submissions, this Tax Case (Appeal) is dismissed as withdrawn leaving the questions of law open to be decided in an appropriate matter. No costs. (A.S.M, J.) (K.R.S, J.) 13-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes ssm To 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. 2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras ‘C’ Bench, Chennai. TCA No. 442 of 2016 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2026 01:01:40 pm )

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →