THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. M/S S&S FOUNDATIONS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue. The dismissal was based on the submission made by the Revenue's counsel that the appeals were not being pursued due to a low tax effect, falling below the threshold limit stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. Consequently, the substantial questions of law framed at the time of admission were left open. The Court granted liberty to the Revenue to seek restoration of the appeals if the tax effect was found to be above the threshold limit, allowing them to be heard and decided on merits. No costs were imposed. The specific findings on the merits of the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) were not adjudicated.
What were the facts?
The Revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai, filed six appeals (TCA.Nos.71 to 76 of 2015) before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. These appeals challenged a common order dated 23.04.2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai 'B' Bench. The appeals pertained to assessment years 2000-01 to 2005-06. The High Court admitted these appeals on substantial questions of law on 15.04.2015. The assessee is M/s. S&S Foundations P. Ltd.
What were the issues?
The High Court was to decide two substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the ITAT was right in deleting the penalty proceedings initiated under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Whether the ITAT was right in law in holding that no penalty proceedings were to be initiated despite the admission of undisclosed income by a Director, K. Sundar Raj, at the time of search. The Revenue's contention, as presented by the learned Senior Standing Counsel, was that the appeals were not being pursued due to a low tax effect, citing CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 which increased the monetary limit for appeals to the High Court to Rs. 1 Crore. The tax effect in these cases was stated to be below this threshold. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the assessee regarding the merits of the penalty proceedings.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
TCA.Nos.71 to 76 of 2015 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 27.08.2019 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Mrs.Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal Nos.71 to 76 of 2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. ...Appellant Vs M/s.S&S Foundations P. Ltd., Old No.19, New No.45 Giriappa Road, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017. ...Respondent APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order dated 23.04.2010 made in ITA.Nos.1761 to 1766/Mds/2009 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2005-06. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, SC For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman
for Mr.S.Sridhar COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J) We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.71 to 76 of 2015 appellant – Revenue and Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel for Mr.S.Sridhar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent - assessee. 2.These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are directed against the common order dated 23.04.2010 made in ITA.Nos.1761 to 1766/Mds/2009 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2005-06. 3.The appeals were admitted on 15.04.2015 on the following substantial questions of law : “i.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting the penalty proceeding levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act? and ii.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that no penalty proceedings were to be initiated in spite of the fact that K.Sundar Raj, the Director had admitted undisclosed income at the time of search?" 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant submits that the above appeals are not pursued by the Revenue on account of the low tax effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.8.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. By the said Circular, the monetary limit for filing or 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.71 to 76 of 2015 pursuing an appeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that the tax effect in the respective cases is less than the threshold limit. 5. In the light of the said submissions, the above tax case appeals are dismissed on account of the low tax effect. The substantial questions of law framed are left open. In the event the tax effect in the respective cases is above the threshold 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. (T.S.S.J.) (V.B.S.J.) 27.08.2019 cse Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes (or) No To 1.M/s.S&S Foundations P. Ltd., Old No.19, New No.45 Giriappa Road, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017. 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench. 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.71 to 76 of 2015 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J. AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J. cse TCA.Nos.71 to 76 of 2015 27.08.2019 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- Anisha Busa vs. Sibar Institute Of Dental SciencesAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026