THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. RATHANA STORES PVT LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted that the appellant's counsel stated that the monetary limit involved in the appeal was below the limit prescribed in Circular No.09/2024, dated 17.09.2024, issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes. The counsel further indicated that they had instructions to withdraw the appeal on this basis. The Court acknowledged that the withdrawal was solely due to the monetary limit and not an admission of the Department's stand. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs was made.
What were the facts?
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai (the appellant/Revenue) filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai, dated 12.02.2016 in ITA No.1434/Mds/2013. The respondent is M/s. Rathna Stores Pvt. Ltd. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. The appellant's counsel stated that the monetary limit involved in the appeal was below the limit prescribed in Circular No.09/2024, dated 17.09.2024, issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes. Consequently, the counsel had instructions to withdraw the appeal.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is to be withdrawn due to the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No.09/2024, dated 17.09.2024? (Question of fact and procedure) Assessee's Contentions: No appearance was made by the respondent assessee. Therefore, no contentions were recorded for the assessee. Revenue's Contentions: The appellant's counsel stated that the monetary limit involved in the appeal is below the prescribed limit in Circular No.09/2024. The counsel further stated that they have instructions to withdraw the appeal on this ground, without conceding the stand of the Department.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
TCA No.684 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12.06.2025 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN TCA No.684 of 2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai Appellant Vs M/s.Rathna Stores Pvt. Ltd., 79, Usman Road, Chennai-600 017 PAN AACCR7287F Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Chennai, dated 12.02.2016 in ITA No.1434/Mds/2013. For Appellant: Mr.T.Ravikumar For Respondent: No appearance __________ Page 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/06/2025 04:56:42 pm ) TCA No.684 of 2016 JUDGMENT (Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Shri Ravikumar states that the monetary limit involved in this appeal is below the monetary limit prescribed in Circular No.09/2024, dated 17.09.2024, issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Government of India. Counsel says that he has instructions, therefore, to withdraw the appeal. 2. Counsel also states that the withdrawal is only due to the monetary limit and without conceding the stand of the Department. Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. (K.R.SHRIRAM, CJ.) (SUNDER MOHAN, J.)
12.06.2025 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No bbr __________ Page 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/06/2025 04:56:42 pm ) TCA No.684 of 2016 To: 1. The Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) V Chennai 3. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle V(3), Chennai __________ Page 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/06/2025 04:56:42 pm ) TCA No.684 of 2016 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND SUNDER MOHAN,J. bbr
TCA No.684 of 2016
12.06.2025 __________ Page 4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/06/2025 04:56:42 pm )
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026