The High Court dismissed the Revenue's Tax Case Appeal against the ITAT because the tax effect was below Rs. 50 lakhs, as per a Central Board of Direct Taxes circular dated 11.7.2018. The substantial questions of law remain open.
The appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed with the tax effect being less than Rs. 50 lakhs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.12.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
Tax Case Appeal No.112 of 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax Tamil Nadu-VIII, Chennai. ... Appellant
Vs. Smt.Shilpa Dugar Chennai-600 018 ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 27.6.2008 made in IT (SS)A No.49/Mds/2006, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Chennai 34 dated 26.12.2005 in ITA No.81/05-06 for the Assessment Year (Block 1.4.88 to 15.12.98) against the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle IV (3), Chennai dated 29.06.2005 in P.A.No./G.I.No.ALUPS3201L/756-S.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.Premalatha J U D G M E N T
(Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J)
This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue calling in question the correctness of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 27.6.2008 made in IT(SS)A No.49/Mds/2006, by raising the following substantial questions of law:
"(i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee as a share holder of TNPL had not received any cash consideration for accepting the merger of TDPL with SPIL?
(ii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that interest paid by SPIL to the assessee for the period from 1.7.1997 till the date of search cannot be brought to tax?"
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CCC)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Madras 'C' Bench,
Chennai.
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal-I)
Chennai-34.
TCA No.112 of 2009 rr[co] srg 15/03/2019
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee received no cash consideration for the merger?
Whether interest paid by SPIL to the assessee is taxable?
Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to tax effect being below the statutory limit?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
The Commissioner of Income Tax Tamil Nadu-VIII, Chennai
Smt. Shilpa Dugar
VINEET KOTHARI
ANITA SUMANTH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
