Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue filed two appeals against the orders of the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax concerning Assessment Years 2023-24 and 2024-25. The core issue revolved around the deductibility of TDS on interest payments made by the assessee to TUFIDCO and TNUIFSL.
Held
The Tribunal noted that no one appeared for the assessee. Both appeals were found to have a tax effect less than the monetary limit of Rs. 60 lakhs, as per CBDT Circular No. 09 of 2024. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed as not maintainable.
Key Issues
Whether the Revenue's appeals are maintainable given the tax effect below the prescribed monetary limit, and whether the TDS deduction on interest payments was correctly handled by the assessee.
Sections Cited
250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 201(1), 201(1A), 194A(3)(mm)(f)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHENNAI BENCHES “B” :: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI
ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM : These two appeals filed by the Revenue directed against the separate orders of ld.Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal), Ranchi passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2023-24 and 2024-25 both dated 08.10.2025. For the sake of convenience, both these
2. The Revenue raised the following grounds of appeal :
1. 1. 1. 1. 1. On the farts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the d Addl/JCIT IAL RANCHI erred in deleting the entire demand of Rs. 4,89,342/- raised u/s 201(1) and 20111A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for FY 2022-23 without properly appreciating the fact that the assessee deductor had dearly failed to deducted as at source as per the provisions of Chapter XVII B of the Act.
1.
The Ld. Addi/JCIT (AL, RANCHI failed to appreciate that the assessce deductor was clearly liable to deduct TDS u/s 1944 on Interest payments made during the year to M/S TUFIDCO & M/s TNUIFSL and the compliance furnished by the assessee deductor that there was no MOU signed between the assesse deductor and the deductee M/s. TUFIDCO & M/s TNUIFSL to deduct the TDS on interest payments made is not acceptable Hence the assessee deductor was rightly treated as an assessee in default under section 201(1) and 201(14)
3. The Ld. AddI/JCIT (A), RANCHI erred in overlooking the fact that the liability to deduct the TDS by the assessee deductor arises since the interest recipient M/s. TUFIDCO & M/s TNUIFSL is not fully owned by the Government and the provisions of Section 19-4A(3)()(f) doesn't attract in this case
4. Here, it is clarified that there are three shareholders of the M/s TUFIDCO. Out of three shareholders, State Government of Tamil Nadu having 96.7375 shares, Urban local bodies having 2.4375% shares and M/s Housing and urban Development Corporation Ltd (HUDCO) having 0.6250%. On an analysis of the provisions 194A(3)(mm)(f) of the Income tax Act 1961, it is noticed that any company, in which all the shares are held 100% of shares by the Government is exempted from TDS deductions in this case, Out of 100% of shares of M/s TUFIDCO, State Government holds 96.7375% only, balance 3.2625% shares.”
3. At the outset of hearing, no one appeared for the hearing on behalf of the assessee.
ITA Nos.3685 & 3686/CHNY/2025 [A]
It was observed from the record that the tax effect involved in the above appeal is Rs.4,89,542/- which is less than Rs.60 lakhs. The CBDT vide Circular No.09 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 has increased the monetary limit for filing the appeal by the Revenue before the ITAT to Rs.60 Lakhs. In the said circular, it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs.60 lakhs appeals should not be filed. Thus, taking note of CBDT Circular No. 09 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 and considering the fact that the tax effect in the instant appeal is less than Rs.60 lakhs, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed as withdrawn / not maintainable. However, we make it clear that the issues raised in the instant appeal is left open to be examined in the appropriate proceedings, if arises, in future. At the same time, we also make it clear that if the appeal fall in any of the exceptions referred to in the above said CBDT Circular, the Revenue is at liberty to move an application for recalling the order, if so advised. Accordingly, in the light of CBDT circular No.09 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024, this appeal stands dismissed.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in is dismissed.
& 3686/CHNY/2025 [A] 6. It was observed from the record that the tax effect involved in the above appeal is Rs1,93,353/- which is less than Rs.60 lakhs. The CBDT vide Circular No.09 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 has increased the monetary limit for filing the appeal by the Revenue before the ITAT to Rs.60 Lakhs. In the said circular, it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs.60 lakhs appeals should not be filed. Thus, taking note of CBDT Circular No. 09 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 and considering the fact that the tax effect in the instant appeal is less than Rs.60 lakhs, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed as withdrawn / not maintainable. However, we make it clear that the issues raised in the instant appeal is left open to be examined in the appropriate proceedings, if arises, in future. At the same time, we also make it clear that if the appeal fall in any of the exceptions referred to in the above said CBDT Circular, the Revenue is at liberty to move an application for recalling the order, if so advised. Accordingly, in the light of CBDT circular No.09 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024, this appeal stands dismissed.
ITA Nos.3685 & 3686/CHNY/2025 [A]
To sum up, both appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 17th March, 2026.