PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF IN vs. M/S.MAILAM SUBRMANIYA SWAMY

PDF · subscribers
TCA/673/2019HC Madras23 September 2019Bench: Hon`ble The ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE5 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the substantial questions of law on merits. Instead, the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue brought to the court's notice a Circular instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) vide Circular No.17/2019 dated 8th August 2019. This circular 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/-. As the tax effect in these cases was stated to be less than this monetary limit, the Revenue's appeals were dismissed as withdrawn. The court explicitly stated that the substantial questions of law were kept open for determination in appropriate cases. No costs were awarded, and the connected civil miscellaneous petitions were closed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, filed four Tax Case Appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. These appeals challenged a common order dated 06.12.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'C' Bench, Chennai. The appeals pertained to Assessment Years 2010-11, 2011-12, 2009-10, and 2012-13, concerning the assessee, M/s.Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Educational Trust. The core of the dispute involved the ITAT's decision regarding the initiation of proceedings under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the ITAT was correct in holding that the assessing officer cannot initiate proceedings under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act when no incriminating material was found during a search operation under Section 132 of the Act. 2. Whether the ITAT was correct in relying on the dismissal of a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the case of PCIT v. Meeta Gutgutia (96 taxmann.com 468) when the issue of jurisdiction under Section 153A was not before the Supreme Court in that SLP. 3. Whether the ITAT was justified in deciding the issue based on an SLP dismissal simpliciter, disregarding the principle that such dismissals have no binding effect, as established in CIT v. Geetha Ramakrishna Mills (P) Ltd. (288 ITR 489) and Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala (245 ITR 360). Contentions: Assessee: The judgment does not record specific contentions made by the assessee. However, the ITAT's order, which is under challenge, likely supported the assessee's position on the issues raised. Revenue: The Revenue contended that the ITAT erred in its findings regarding the initiation of proceedings under Section 153A and in its reliance on the Supreme Court's SLP dismissal in the Meeta Gutgutia case, arguing that such dismissals do not have binding precedent on the specific jurisdictional issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 153A,Section 132

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Judgment dt. 23.09.2019 in TC(A) Nos.673, 674, 677 and 678 of 2019 Prl. Commr. of Income Tax v. M/s.Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Educational Trust IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23.09.2019 CORAM : THE HON'BLE DR.VINEET KOTHARI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.673, 674, 677 and 678 of 2019 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central I, No.108, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. .. Appellant in all appeals -vs- M/s.Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Educational Trust, No.54, Meenatchi Nagar, Poonthotam, Villupuram-605 602 .. Respondent in all appeals Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the common order of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 06.12.2018 made in ITA.No.2086, 2087, 2085 and 2088/Chny/2018. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar Sr. Standing Counsel __________ Page 1 of 5 http://www.judis.nic.in Judgment dt. 23.09.2019 in TC(A) Nos.673, 674, 677 and 678 of 2019 Prl. Commr. of Income Tax v. M/s.Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Educational Trust COMMON JUDGMENT (Delivered by The Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice) These Tax Case Appeals have been filed by the Revenue, calling in question the correctness of the common order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 06.12.2018, for the Assessment Years 2010-11; 2011-12; 2009-10 and 2012-13 respectively by raising the following common substantial questions of law: “1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in holding that the assessing officer cannot initiate proceedings under Section 153A of the I.T. Act, where there was no incriminating material found during the course of search operation u/s.132 of the Act? 2.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in law in placing reliance on SLP dismissal simpliciter in the case of PCIT v. Meeta Gutgutia (96 taxmann.com 468), when the issue of jurisdiction u/s.153A of the I.T. Act was not at all before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said SLP? __________ Page 2 of 5 http://www.judis.nic.in Judgment dt. 23.09.2019 in TC(A) Nos.673, 674, 677 and 678 of 2019 Prl. Commr. of Income Tax v. M/s.Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Educational Trust 3.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in deciding the impugned issue on the basis of SLP (Special Leave Petition) dismissal simpliciter by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Meeta Gutgutia, without taking cognizance of the well settled ratio that SLP dismissal simpliciter has no binding effect, as laid down in the cases of CIT v. Geetha Ramakrishna Mills (P) Ltd. (288 ITR 489) (Mad.) and Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala (245 ITR 360)(SC)?” 2. When these matters are taken up for hearing, the learned Senior Standing Counsel brought to our notice the Circular instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No.17/2019 dated 8th August 2019, wherein, it is stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). 3. In these cases, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the Appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed, as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial __________ Page 3 of 5 http://www.judis.nic.in Judgment dt. 23.09.2019 in TC(A) Nos.673, 674, 677 and 678 of 2019 Prl. Commr. of Income Tax v. M/s.Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Educational Trust questions of law for determination in appropriate cases. No costs. Consequently, C.M.P.Nos.20305, 20308 and 20396 of 2019 are closed.

(V.K.,ACJ.) (C.S.N.,J.) 23.09.2019 Index : Yes/No bbr To: 1. The Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "C" Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, 108, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(3), Chennai. __________ Page 4 of 5 http://www.judis.nic.in Judgment dt. 23.09.2019 in TC(A) Nos.673, 674, 677 and 678 of 2019 Prl. Commr. of Income Tax v. M/s.Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Educational Trust The Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice and C.Saravanan, J. bbr

T.C.(A) Nos.673, 674, 677 and 678 of 2019 23.09.2019 __________ Page 5 of 5 http://www.judis.nic.in

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →