THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KANISHK GOLD PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
TCA/558/2015HC Madras2026/MHC/434328 October 2026Bench: Honourable Dr.Justice ANITA SUMANTH4 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that nothing survived in the appeal filed by the Revenue. The reasoning was that the assessee company was undergoing insolvency proceedings before the NCLT, and the Income-Tax Department had filed its claim within those proceedings. The Court noted that it was for the official liquidator to consider the Income-Tax Department's claim and for the NCLT to pass appropriate orders. Consequently, the substantial questions of law were left unanswered, and the tax case appeal was closed. No specific finding was given on the merits of the ITAT's order, as the appeal was disposed of on procedural grounds related to the insolvency proceedings.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai (appellant/Revenue) filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 05.05.2014. The appeal pertained to assessment year 2009-10 and concerned M/s Kanishk Gold Pvt Ltd (respondent/assessee). The assessee company was before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, at the instance of the State Bank of India. The liquidator appointed by the NCLT confirmed that 12 financial creditors and 9 operational creditors had filed claims. The Income Tax Department had also filed a claim of Rs. 1,22,56,76,779/-. The Revenue acknowledged that the demand under the subject appeal was part of this total claim.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, survives for consideration, given the proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the filing of a claim by the Income-Tax Department before the liquidator. Assessee's Contention: The respondent, represented by the liquidator, did not explicitly argue any specific points. However, the presence of the liquidator and the submission of a memo indicating claims filed before the NCLT implicitly suggest that the matter of the Revenue's claim should be adjudicated within the NCLT framework. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its Senior Standing Counsel, confirmed that the demand under the appeal was part of the larger claim filed before the liquidator. The Revenue acknowledged that the appeal's subject matter was encompassed within the insolvency proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

2026:MHC:4343 TCA No. 558 of 2015 __________ Page 1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28-10-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.KARTHIKEYAN TCA No. 558 of 2015 CNR:{HCMA010515382015} The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai ..Appellant(s) Vs M/s Kanishk Gold Pvt Ltd 43, Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 034 ..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 05.05.2014 in ITA No. 1323/Mds/2012 for assessment year 2009 – 10. For Appellant(s): Mrs.V.Pushpa, Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent(s): Ms.Santhalakshmi for Mr.A.Swaminathan, for Liquidator JUDGMENT (Delivered by Dr.Anita Sumanth, J.) The appellant has challenged an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal / ITAT) dated 05.05.2014 for assessment year (AY) 2009 – 10. 2. We have heard Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned Senior Standing Counsel, for https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 07:49:03 pm ) 2026:MHC:4343 TCA No. 558 of 2015 __________ Page 2 of 4 the appellant and Ms.Santhalakshmi, learned counsel for respondent / liquidator, appointed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) as the assessee / Kanishk Gold Private Limited is before the NCLT at the instance of the State Bank of India in an application moved under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. 3. The liquidator has filed a memo dated 21.10.2004 confirming the position that 12 financial creditors and 9 operational creditors have made claims before the liquidator. The Department has also filed a claim for Rs.1,22,56,76,779/-. 4. Learned Senior Standing Counsel confirms the position that the demand under the subject appeal is also part of the total claim of the Department as above. A copy of Form C dated 17.02.2020 is also placed on record. 5. In light of the aforesaid, nothing survives in this appeal as it is for the official liquidator to consider the claim of the Income-Tax Department and NCLT to pass necessary and appropriate orders in that regard. 6. Recording the aforesaid, this tax case (appeal) is closed returning the substantial questions of law unanswered. No costs. (A.S.M, J.) (S.K, J.) 28-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes ssm https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 07:49:03 pm ) 2026:MHC:4343 TCA No. 558 of 2015 __________ Page 3 of 4 To 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. 2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras ‘C’ Bench, Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 07:49:03 pm ) 2026:MHC:4343 TCA No. 558 of 2015 __________ Page 4 of 4 DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J. AND S.KARTHIKEYAN, J. ssm TCA No. 558 of 2015 28-10-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 07:49:03 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 →