THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T vs. RUDRA BLADES AND EDGES P LTD

PDF · subscribers
TCA/884/2019HC Madras15 November 2019Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice N. KIRUBAKARAN6 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the Tax Case Appeal on the ground of tax effect. The Court referred to Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018, which stipulates that appeals shall not be filed before the High Court where the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 50,00,000/-. As the tax effect in the present case was less than this limit, the appeal was dismissed. However, the substantial questions of law framed were left open. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to mention the case before the Court for restoration if the tax effect is found to be above the prescribed limit, to be heard and decided on merits. No costs were awarded.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai (appellant/Revenue) filed a Tax Case Appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal). The Tribunal had allowed the assessee's appeal, setting aside a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The penalty was imposed by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax on the grounds that the assessee, M/s. Rudra Blades and Edges (P) Ltd. (respondent/assessee), filed a belated return and claimed relief under Section 80IB for which they were allegedly ineligible. The assessment year in question is 2008-2009. The appeal was admitted on substantial questions of law.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, especially when the assessee had filed the return belatedly beyond the time limit specified under Section 139(1) but claimed relief under Section 80IB for which they were ineligible, thereby knowingly filing inaccurate particulars of income? 2. Whether the reasoning and finding of the Tribunal is proper, especially when Section 80AC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, clearly specifies that filing the return of income within the due date was mandatory for claiming deduction under Section 80IB, which was not the case? Assessee's contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's contentions: The tax effect in this case is less than Rs. 50,00,000/- and is covered by Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the CBDT, which prescribes a monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- for filing appeals before the High Court. Therefore, the appeal should be dismissed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 139(1),Section 80IB,Section 80AC,Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

T.C.A.No.884 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 15.11.2019 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN T.C.A.No.884 of 2019 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai.

... Appellant Vs M/s.Rudra Blades and Edges (P) Ltd., 36, Josier Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. PANO: AAACR3669P

...Respondent PRAYER: Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 28.06.2016 in ITA No.272/Mds/2015 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras 'B' Bench for the assessment year 2008-2009. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar For Respondent : Mr.D.Anand 1/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.884 of 2019

J U D G M E N T (Order of the Court was delivered by N.KIRUBAKARAN, J)

The appeal has been preferred against the order of the Tribunal which allowed the assessee's appeal filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax who confirmed the order of the assessing officer levying penalty under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground of filing belated return. 2.This Tax Case Appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law; “1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act especially when the assessee had filed the Return belatedly beyond the time limit specified under Section 139 (1) but however claimed relief under Section 80 IB for which he was not ineligible to claim thereby knowingly filed inaccurate particulars of Income? 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.884 of 2019 2.Whether the reasoning and finding of the Tribunal is proper especially when as per Section 80 AC of Income Tax Act clearly specify that the filing of the return of income within the due date was mandotory for claiming deduction under Section 80 IB of the Income Tax Act which is not the case on hand?"

3.Heard Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr.D.Anand, learned Counsel for the respondent. 4.Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Counsel for the appellant would submit that the tax effect in this case is less than Rs.50,00,000/- and is covered by Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 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.50,00,000/-. In this case, tax effect is less than Rs.50,00,000/- and therefore, the case has to be dismissed. 3/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.884 of 2019 5.This Court perused the circular dated 11.07.2018 and Paragraph Nos.2 & 3 of the Circular, which prescribes monetary limit for filing appeal. Paragraph Nos.2 & 3 is usefully extracted as follows: "2.In supersession of the above circular, it has been decided by the Board that departmental appeals may be filed on merits before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and High Courts and SLPs / appeals before Supreme Court keeping in view the monetary limits and conditions specified below 3.Henceforth, appeals / SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given under: S.No. Appeals / SLPs in Income-tax matters Monetary Limit (Rs.) 1. Before Appeallate Tribunal 20,00,000 2. Before High Court 50,00,000 3. Before Supreme Court 1,00,00,000" 4/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.884 of 2019 6.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and also in view of the Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Director, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Delhi, the Tax Case Appeal is dismissed on account of tax effect. However, the substantial questions 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.) 15.11.2019 ay To The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai. 5/6 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.884 of 2019 N.KIRUBAKARAN, J. and P.VELMURUGAN, J. ay

T.C.A.No.884 of 2019

Dated:15.11.2019 6/6 http://www.judis.nic.in

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →