COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MR.A.B.S.SANJJAY
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue. The dismissal was based on the Revenue's submission that they were not pursuing the appeals due to low tax effect, citing CBDT Circular No.17/2019 which increased the monetary limit for pursuing appeals before the High Court to Rs.1 Crore. The Court noted that the tax effect in these cases was below the threshold limit. Consequently, the substantial questions of law framed at the time of admission were left open. The Revenue was granted liberty to mention the case for restoration if the tax effect was found to be above the threshold limit. No costs were imposed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax, filed three appeals (TCA.Nos.755 to 757 of 2015) before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. These appeals challenged a common order dated 24.01.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai 'D' Bench. The appeals pertained to assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05, and 2005-06. The ITAT's order had quashed assessments made under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeals were admitted on substantial questions of law. However, during the hearing, the Revenue sought to withdraw the appeals.
What were the issues?
The High Court was to decide four substantial questions of law concerning assessments made under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961: 1. Whether the ITAT was correct in quashing the assessment under Section 153A due to the absence of seized materials for making fresh assessments. 2. Whether the ITAT was correct in quashing the assessment under Section 153A when only an intimation under Section 143(1) was issued, and not a regular assessment, for assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05. 3. Whether the ITAT correctly appreciated that Section 153A requires determination of 'total income' as opposed to 'undisclosed income' under the old search assessment procedure. 4. Whether the ITAT was correct in holding that assessments under Section 153A can only be based on incriminating material, disregarding the non-obstante clause that excludes reopening under Section 147. The Revenue argued these points in its appeals. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the assessee on these issues.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
TCA.Nos.755 to 757 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.755 to 757 of 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax, Central III, 108, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai - 600 034. ...Appellant Vs Mr.A.B.S.Sanjjay ...Respondent APPEALS under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order dated 24.01.2014 made in ITA.Nos.1691, 1692 and 1693/Mds/2013 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, SSC assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani, SC For Respondent : Mr.G.Baskar 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 appellant – Revenue and Mr.G.Baskar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent - assessee. 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.755 to 757 of 2015 2.These appeals, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are directed against the common order dated 24.01.2014 made in ITA.Nos.1691, 1692 and 1693/Mds/2013 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004- 05 and 2005-06. 3.The appeals were admitted on 13.10.2015 on the following substantial questions of law : “(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in quashing the assessment made under Section 153A, as there are no seized materials to make fresh assessments? (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in quashing the assessment made under Section 153A, when there is no regular assessment, but only intimation done under Section 143(1) of the Act for the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05? (iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in not appreciating that the new search assessment procedure under Section 153A of the Act wherein the 'total income' is to be determined whereas in the old search assessment procedure, the 'undisclosed income' is to be determined? and (iv) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in holding that any assessment under Section 153A can be done only based on incriminating material ignoring the non-obstante clause which excludes reopening under Section 147?” 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.755 to 757 of 2015 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 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 The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench. 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.755 to 757 of 2015 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J. AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J. cse TCA.Nos.755 to 757 of 2015 27.08.2019 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in
More judgments on Section 153A
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Ig3 Infra Limited, KanchipuramITA 2578/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Ig3 Infra Limited, OggiamthoraipakkaITA 2577/CHNY/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Shanmugham Thiagarajan, ChennaiITA 2576/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026