COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CHENNAI METROPOLITAN,

PDF · subscribers
TCA/583/2015HC Madras29 August 2022Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice R. MAHADEVAN4 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The dismissal was based on the submission by the Revenue's counsel regarding CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, which 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/-. The Revenue confirmed that the tax effect in the present appeal was less than this monetary limit. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with the substantial question of law left open for determination in an appropriate case. No costs were awarded. The specific findings of the ITAT on the exemption under Sections 11 and 12, and the reasoning behind it, were not adjudicated by the High Court due to the dismissal of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai (appellant/Revenue) filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 24.10.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai. The appeal pertained to assessment year 2005-06 and concerned the assessee, M/s. Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority. The High Court admitted the appeal on 03.08.2015, framing a substantial question of law regarding the assessee's entitlement to exemption under Sections 11 and 12 based on a revised return filed under Section 139(5).

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled for exemption under Section 11 and Section 12, which was claimed in the time-barred/non-est. revised return filed by the assessee under Section 139(5) of the Act by changing its status? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. The issue arose from the Tribunal's order allowing exemption. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's appeal was based on the substantial question of law framed by the High Court. However, during the hearing, the Revenue's counsel brought to the court's notice CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, stating that appeals should not be filed or pursued where the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. The Revenue submitted that the tax effect in this appeal was below this threshold.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 139(5),Section 11,Section 12

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

T.C.A.No.583 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.08.2022 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.No.583 of 2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ... Appellant

Versus M/s. Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Thalamuthu Natarajan Building, 1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008. PAN: AAAAC 1918J ... Respondent

Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 24.10.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1932/Mds/2014.

For Appellant : Mr.J.Narayanasamy Senior Standing Counsel Page 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.583 of 2015 For Respondent : Mr. G.Baskar JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the order dated 24.10.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1932/Mds/2014, relating to the assessment year 2005-06.

2.By order dated 03.08.2015, this court admitted the aforesaid tax case appeal on the following substantial question of law: “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled for exemption under Section 11 and Section 12 which was claimed in the time barred/non est. revised return filed by the assessee under Section 139(5) of the Act by changing its status." 3.When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned 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 Page 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.583 of 2015 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. 4.In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned 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 question of law for determination in an appropriate case. No costs. (R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q., J.) 29.08.2022

Internet : Yes

Index : Yes / No av To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. 3. The Assistant Director of Income Tax (Exemptions)-IV, Aayakar Bhavan Annexe Bldg, III floor, 121, M.G.Road, Chennai - 600 034. Page 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.583 of 2015 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- VII , Chennai. R. MAHADEVAN, J. and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. av T.C.A.No.583 of 2015 29.08.2022 Page 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

More judgments on Section 139(5)

All 830 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →