THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. M/S RANE HOLDINGS LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the Tax Case Appeals on the ground of tax effect. The Court referred to Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019, which specifies a monetary limit of Rs.1 crore for filing appeals before the High Court. Since the tax effect in these appeals was less than Rs.1 crore, the appeals were dismissed. However, the substantial questions of law framed were left open. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to mention the case for restoration if the tax effect is found to be above the prescribed limit, to be heard and decided on merits. No costs were awarded. The connected Miscellaneous Petition was also closed.
What were the facts?
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai (Revenue) filed two appeals (T.C.A.Nos.635 & 636 of 2018) before the High Court of Judicature at Madras against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Madras “D” Bench, dated 27.10.2017. The ITAT had dismissed the Revenue's appeals against the common order passed by the CIT-3 on 31.01.2017 for Assessment Years 2008-09 and 2012-13. The dispute pertains to disallowances made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D concerning exempted income. The High Court admitted the appeals on substantial questions of law.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Tribunal was right in deleting the disallowance made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D with regard to the exempted income, especially when there is no provision under the Income Tax Act to exclude investments made in a subsidiary company while computing disallowances? (Question of law) 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in not considering that as per Section 14A, expenditure incurred in connection with exempted income is not allowable as a deduction and shall be disallowed even if the assessee does not claim such expenditure? (Question of law) Assessee's arguments: Not recorded. Revenue's arguments: The tax effect in these cases is less than Rs.1 crore. As per Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the CBDT, the monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Court is Rs.1 crore. Therefore, these appeals should be dismissed.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
T.C.A.Nos.635 & 636 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 26.02.2020 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN T.C.A.Nos.635 & 636 of 2018 and C.M.P.No.12802 of 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ... Appellant in both the Appeals Vs M/s.Rane Holdings Ltd., “Maithri” No.132, Cathedral Road, Chennai 600 086. PAN: AABCR5136J ... Respondent in both the Appeals PRAYER : Appeals under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “D” Bench, dated 27.10.2017 in ITA.No.1089 & 1090/Mds/2017. For Appellant :Mr.T.Raavi Kumar Senior standing counsel For Respondent :M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan 1/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.635 & 636 of 2018 C O M M O N J U D G M E N T (Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.KIRUBAKARAN, J) The Appeals have been preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “D” Bench, dated 27.10.2017 in ITA.No.1089 & 1090/Mds/2017 for the Assessment year 2008-09 & 2012-13 respectively. 2.The Revenue has filed Appeal before the ITAT against the common order passed by the CIT-3, on 31.01.2017 for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2012-13. The ITAT has rejected the claim of the revenue and dismissed the same, against which only the present Appeals have been filed. 3.These appeals are admitted on the following substantial questions of law : “(i)Whether the Tribunal was right in deleting the disallowance made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D with regard to the exempted income especially when there is no provision under the Income Tax Act to exclude investments made in the subsidiary company while computing the disallowances? (ii)Whether the Tribunal was right in not considering the fact that 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.635 & 636 of 2018 as per the provisions of Section 14A, the expenditure incurred in connection with exempted income is not allowable as a deduction and the same shall be disallowed even when the assessee does not claim such an expenditure?” 4.Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the tax effect in this case is less than Rs.1 crore and is covered by Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Director, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, Delhi. As per the said circular, the monetary limit to file an appeal before the High Court is fixed at Rs.1 crore. In these cases, tax effect is less than Rs.1 crore and therefore, the cases have to be dismissed. 5.This Court perused the circular dated 08.08.2019 and Paragraph No.2 of the said Circular, which prescribes monetary limit for filing appeal is usefully extracted as follows: 2.As a step towards further management of litigation, it has been decided by the Board that monetary limits for filing of appeals in income-tax cases be enhanced further through amendment in Para 3 of the Circular mentioned above and accordingly, the table for monetary limits 3/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.635 & 636 of 2018 specified in Para 3 of the Circular shall read as follows: S.No. Appeals / SLPs in Income-tax matters Monetary Limit (Rs.) 1. Before Appeallate Tribunal 50,00,000 2. Before High Court 1,00,00,000 3. Before Supreme Court 2,00,00,000 6.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and also in view of the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Director, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Delhi, the Tax Case Appeals are dismissed on account of tax effect. However, the substantial questions of law framed is left open. In the event the tax effect is above the limit fixed in the said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appeals to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed. (NKKJ) (PVJ) 26.02.2020 sai To 1.The The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. 4/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.635 & 636 of 2018 2.Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai. 5/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.Nos.635 & 636 of 2018 N.KIRUBAKARAN, J. and P.VELMURUGAN
, J.
sai T.C.A.Nos.635 & 636 of 2018 Dated : 26.02.2020 6/6 http://www.judis.nic.in
More judgments on Section 14A
- Blacksoil Capital Private Limited (As… vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2217/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hiral Construction, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 42(1)(2), MumbaiITA 8431/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- The Dy DIT (It) 1(2), Mumbai vs M/S Citi Bank N.A, MumbaiITA 4981/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S. Citi Bank N.A., Mumbai vs The Addl DIT (It) RG-1, MumbaiITA 4970/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026