COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. UMA RATHI
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the Tax Case Appeal on the ground of low tax effect, citing Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019, which prescribes a monetary limit of Rs.1 Crore for filing appeals before the High Court. The Court noted that the tax effect in this case was less than Rs.1 Crore. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without deciding the substantial question of law. The Court granted liberty to the Revenue to seek restoration of the appeal if the tax effect was found to be above the prescribed limit, to be heard and decided on merits. No costs were awarded.
What were the facts?
This Tax Case Appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai (appellant/revenue) against the order dated 27.09.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Madras 'C' Bench. The ITAT had allowed the appeal filed by Uma Rathi (respondent/assessee), setting aside the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which had dismissed the assessee's appeal. The assessment year in question is 2001-02. The appeal was admitted on a substantial question of law concerning the treatment of unexplained cash credit for deduction under Section 80IB.
What were the issues?
1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that unexplained cash credit admitted and offered by the assessee for assessment under Section 68 should be treated as eligible business profits/income for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IB? The appellant (revenue) argued that the tax effect in this case is less than Rs.1 Crore, which is below the monetary limit for filing an appeal before the High Court as per Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the CBDT. Therefore, the appeal should be dismissed on this ground. The respondent (assessee) did not record any arguments in the judgment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
TCA NO.777 OF 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 28.11.2019 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN T.C.A.NO.777 OF 2019 Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai.
... Appellant Vs. Uma Rathi
... Respondent PRAYER: Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 27.09.2007 in I.T.A.No.2635/Mds/2004 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras 'C' Bench for the assessment year 2001-02. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.M.P.Senthilkumar 1/6 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA NO.777 OF 2019 J U D G M E N T (Judgment of the Court was made by N.KIRUBAKARAN, J.)
This Tax Case Appeal has been filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 27.09.2007 passed in I.T.A.No.2635/Mds/2004 allowing the appeal filed by the respondent against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by which the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed. 2. Heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant. 3. This Tax Case Appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law: "1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that unexplained cash credit admitted and offered by the assessee for assessment u/s.68 should be treated as the eligible business profits / income for the purpose of deduction under section 801B?. " 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA NO.777 OF 2019 4. Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the tax effect in this case is less than Rs.1 Crore and is covered by Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Director, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, Delhi. As per the said circular, the monetary limit to file an appeal before the High Court is fixed at Rs.1 Crore. In this case, tax effect is less than Rs.1 Crore and therefore, the appeal has to be dismissed. 5. This Court perused the circular dated 08.08.2019 and Paragraph No.2 of the Circular, which prescribes monetary limit for filing appeal. Paragraph No.2 is usefully extracted as follows: "2. As a step towards further management of litigation, it has been decided by the Board that monetary limits for filing of appeals in income-tax cases be enhanced further through amendment in Para 3 of the Circular mentioned above and accordingly, the table for monetary limits specified in Para 3 of the Circular shall read as follows: 3/6 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA NO.777 OF 2019 S.No. Appeals / SLPs in Income-tax matters Monetary Limit (Rs.) 1. Before Appeallate Tribunal 50,00,000 2. Before High Court 1,00,00,000 3. Before Supreme Court 2,00,00,000 6.In view of the submissions made by the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and also in view of the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Director, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Delhi, this Tax Case Appeal is dismissed on account of tax effect. However, the substantial question of law framed is left open. In the event the tax effect is above the limit fixed in the said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. No costs. [N.K.K., J.] [P.V., J.]
28.11.2019 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking / Non-speaking order TK
4/6 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA NO.777 OF 2019 To The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai. 5/6 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA NO.777 OF 2019 N.KIRUBAKARAN, J. AND P.VELMURUGAN, J. TK T.C.A.NO.777 OF 2019 28.11.2019 6/6 http://www.judis.nic.in
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- 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
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