COMMISSIONR OF INCOME TAX vs. T.VIJAYAKUMAR

PDF · subscribers
TCA/848/2015HC Madras22 August 2022Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice R. MAHADEVAN4 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, in its judgment delivered by R. Mahadevan, J., noted that the learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue brought to its notice Circular No. 17/2019 dated August 8, 2019, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT). This circular stipulates that appeals shall not be filed or pursued by the Department before the High Court if the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). The Revenue submitted that the tax effect in the present appeal was less than this threshold limit. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, stating that the substantial question of law was kept open for determination in an appropriate case. No costs were awarded.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai, filed a Tax Case Appeal (TCA) under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated January 30, 2015, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Madras 'A' Bench. The appeal pertained to the Block Period from April 1, 1995, to March 31, 2001, and April 1, 2001, to July 13, 2001. The ITAT's order was challenged before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. The appeal was admitted on October 7, 2015, on a substantial question of law.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessment order passed by the assessing officer under Section 158BD is barred by limitation when there is no time limit for initiation of proceedings under Section 158BD and the assessment order was within the time limit under Section 158BE(2)? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee regarding this issue. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued that the assessment order passed under Section 158BD was not barred by limitation and was within the time limit prescribed under Section 158BE(2). The Revenue questioned the Tribunal's finding that the assessment order was time-barred.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 158BD,Section 158BE(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

TCA.No.848 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 22.08.2022 CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.No. 848 of 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai

.. Appellant Versus T.Vijayakumar L/R of T.Srichand, 28, BNVV Enclave, Anna Nagar, Trichy 620 018.

.. Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras “A” Bench, dated 30.01.2015 passed in IT(SS)A No.10/Mds/2014 in respect of Block Period 1.4.1995 to 31.3.2001 and 1.4.2001 and 13.7.2001. For Appellant : M/s.M. Swaminathan &

V. Pushpa Standing Counsel 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TCA.No.848 of 2015 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the appellant / revenue, questioning the correctness of the order dated 30.01.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras “A” Bench in IT(SS)A No.10/Mds/2014 relating to Block Period 1.4.1995 to 31.3.2001 and 1.4.2001 and 13.7.2001. 2. On 7.10.2015, this tax case appeal is admitted by this Court on the following substantial question of law; ' 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessment order passed by the assessing officer under Section 158BD is barred by limitation when there is no time limit for initiation of proceedings under Section 158BD and the assessment order was within the time limit under Section 158BE(2)?” 3. When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue brought to the notice of this court the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board Direct Taxes, 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TCA.No.848 of 2015 wherein, it is stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). It is also submitted that the tax effect in this appeal is less than the threshold limit. 4. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeal, wherein, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed, is dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial question of law for determination in an appropriate case. No costs. [R.M.D,J.] [M.S.Q., J.] 22.08.2022 msr

Index : Yes / No To 1. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-III, Trichy 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12 Tiruchirappalli 3. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras “A” Bench, Chennai 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TCA.No.848 of 2015 R. MAHADEVAN, J. and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. msr T.C.A.No. 848 of 2015 22.08.2022 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →