COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.THE TAMIL NADU STATE

PDF · subscribers
TCA/830/2019HC Madras22 September 2025Bench: Honourable The CHIEF JUSTICE4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue, noted the submission that the case had a low tax effect. The Revenue's counsel fairly submitted that in view of Circular No. 05/2024 dated 15.03.2024 and Circular No. 09/2024 dated 17.09.2024, issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes, the appellant/Revenue did not wish to proceed with the matter. The court acknowledged this position and, while keeping the question of law open for consideration in an appropriate matter, dismissed the appeal. No specific finding on the merits of the ITAT's order was given as the appeal was withdrawn by the Revenue. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal with no order as to costs.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Trichy (Revenue) against an order dated 30.01.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai. The appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2002-03 and concerns M/s. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd. (Assessee). The specific amount in dispute is not stated in the judgment. The procedural history involves the Revenue filing this appeal before the High Court under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the ITAT's order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue should be dismissed on the grounds of low tax effect, considering the circulars issued by the CBDT? (Question of law, turning on the application of CBDT Circulars No. 05/2024 and 09/2024). Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. The Revenue, through its counsel, submitted that the case has a low tax effect and, in view of the aforementioned circulars, does not wish to proceed with the matter, while requesting the question of law to be kept open. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, represented by its counsel, acknowledged the low tax effect of the case and, citing Circular No. 05/2024 and Circular No. 09/2024 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Government of India, stated its intention not to pursue the appeal further. However, it sought to keep the question of law open for consideration in an appropriate future matter.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

TCA No.830 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22.09.2025 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN TCA No.830 of 2019 Commissioner of Income Tax Trichy. .. Appellant -vs- M/s.The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd., No.27 Railway Station New Road, Kumbakonam 612 001. (PAN: AAACC1294K) .. Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 30.01.2015 passed in ITA No.811/Mds/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B” Bench, Chennai, for the Assessment Year 2002-03. For Appellant : Mr.V.Mahalingam Senior Standing Counsel and Mr.P.E.R.Mangala Suvigaran, Junior Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.G.Tarun for Mr.A.S.Sriraman * * * * * Page 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/09/2025 04:39:40 pm ) TCA No.830 of 2019 JUDGMENT (Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue. Mr.G.Tarun, learned counsel, appears for the respondent/Assessee. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the Revenue fairly submits that it is a case having low tax effect. Therefore, in view of the Circular No.05/2024 dated 15.03.2024 and 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, the appellant/Revenue does not wish to proceed with the matter, though the question of law may be kept open for consideration in the appropriate matter. In that view of the matter, the appeal stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ.) (G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.) 22.09.2025 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No sra Page 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/09/2025 04:39:40 pm ) TCA No.830 of 2019 To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Trichy. Page 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/09/2025 04:39:40 pm ) TCA No.830 of 2019 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN

, J.

(sra) TCA No.830 of 2019 22.09.2025 Page 4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/09/2025 04:39:40 pm )

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →