COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-I vs. SHRI V. SIVASUBRAMANIAN
What did the High Court hold?
The Tribunal decided that the appeal should be dismissed. The reasoning was based on the submission by the Revenue's counsel that the case had a low tax effect. In light of Circular No.05/2024 and Circular No.09/2024, the Revenue did not wish to proceed with the matter. The Court accepted this submission and dismissed the appeal. The questions of law were expressly left open for consideration in an appropriate matter. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal. No order as to costs was made.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirunelveli (the Revenue) against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B” Bench, dated May 31, 2018, in ITA No.1942/Chny/2017. The respondent is V. Sivasubramanian, proprietor of Santhi Sweets. The appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The High Court of Judicature at Madras heard the appeal. The Revenue's counsel submitted that the case had a low tax effect.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal, involving a low tax effect, should be pursued by the Revenue, considering the relevant CBDT circulars. (Question of law) The Revenue argued that due to the low tax effect, and 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, Government of India, they did not wish to proceed with the matter. The Revenue also stated that the questions of law proposed could be kept open for consideration in an appropriate matter. The judgment does not record any arguments from the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
T.C.A.No.902 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12.09.2025 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN T.C.A.No.902 of 2018 and C.M.P.No.21973 of 2018 The Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1 Tirunelveli Appellant Vs V.Sivasubramanian Prop: Santhi Sweets Tirunelveli Junction Respondent PRAYER
: Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B” Bench, dated 31.5.2018 in ITA No.1942/Chny/2017. For Appellant: M/s.V.Mahalingam P.E.R.Mangala Suvigaran Standing Counsel ______________ Page 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/09/2025 04:36:05 pm ) T.C.A.No.902 of 2018 JUDGMENT (Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue. 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 questions of law proposed may be kept open for consideration in the appropriate matter. 3. In that view of the matter, the appeal stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J)
12.09.2025 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No bbr ______________ Page 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/09/2025 04:36:05 pm ) T.C.A.No.902 of 2018 To: 1. The Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-34. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Madurai. ______________ Page 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/09/2025 04:36:05 pm ) T.C.A.No.902 of 2018 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J. bbr
T.C.A.No.902 of 2018
12.09.2025 ______________ Page 4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/09/2025 04:36:05 pm )
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026