PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. EMERALD JEWE INDUSTRY INDIA

TCA/658/2018HC Madras2024/MHC/397326 November 2024Bench: Honourable Dr Justice ANITA SUMANTH2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court recorded the submission of the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant/Department that the Income-Tax Department did not wish to pursue the appeal for assessment year 2011-12 and sought withdrawal on account of low tax effect, as per Circular No. 9 of 2024. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the tax case appeal as withdrawn. The Court explicitly left the questions of law open to be decided in an appropriate matter, meaning no decision on the merits of the case was made.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 1, Coimbatore (the Revenue) against an order dated 07.10.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('B' Bench) in I.T.A.No.1811/Mds/2015. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2011-12 and concerns M/s. Emerald Jewel Industry India Ltd (the Assessee). The Revenue sought to withdraw the appeal. The reason cited for withdrawal was the low tax effect, in line with Circular No. 9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal did not have to decide any substantive questions of law or fact. The sole issue before the High Court was whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be permitted to be withdrawn. The Revenue argued that it did not wish to pursue the appeal for assessment year 2011-12 due to low tax effect, citing Circular No. 9 of 2024. The Assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

T.C.(A)No.658 of 2018

I.T.A.No.1811/Mds/2015

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

2024:MHC:3973 T.C.(A)No.658 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 26.11.2024 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G. ARUL MURUGAN T.C.(A)No.658 of 2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 1, No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore – 641 018. .... Appellant vs M/s.Emerald Jewel Industry India Ltd, 230, T.V. Samy Road [East], R.S. Puram, Coimbatore - 641 002. PAN: AAB CE 3430 A .... Respondent Prayer : Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against order dated 07.10.2016 made in I.T.A.No.1811/Mds/2015 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench in respect of assessment year 2011-12. For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman 1/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.(A)No.658 of 2018 Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J. AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J. JUDGMENT (Delivered by Dr. ANITA SUMANTH.,J) Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, 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 2011-12 and seeks withdrawal of the same on account of the low tax effect per Circular bearing No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024. 2. Recording the aforesaid submission, this tax case appeal is dismissed as withdrawn leaving the questions of law open to be decided in an appropriate matter. [A.S.M., J] [G.A.M., J] sl

26.11.2024 Index:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes Speaking order T.C.(A)No.658 of 2018 2/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →