The High Court dismissed the Revenue's Tax Case Appeal filed against the ITAT order because the tax effect was less than Rs. 50 lakhs as per Circular No. 3/2018. The Court dismissed the appeal as not pressed.
The appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed as not pressed.
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: 10.12.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
Tax Case Appeal No.1159 of 2009
Commissioner of Income Tax, Tiruchirapalli. Appellant/Repondent
Vs. Shri K.Premanathan Respondent/Appellant
Prayer : Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 25.02.2009, made in ITA No.182/mds/2007, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Tiruchirappalli, dated 25.10.2006, made in ITA No.385/CIT(A)/TRY/2005-2006, for the assessment year 2001-2002 and against the order of the Income Tax Officer, Ward IV(1), Tiruchirappalli, dated 31.03.2004, made in PA No.TGIR No.AAGPD9096D for the assessment year 2001-2002.
For respondent : Mr.S.Sridhar
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, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 25.02.2009, in ITA No.182/mds/2007, by raising the following substantial questions of law :
"(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in remanding
the case back to the assessment officer to find out whether cash loans were availed from family members, when it is an admitted fact by the revenue, and directing the officer to delete the penalty under Section 271D on the ground of reasonable cause under Section 273B ?
(ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in the absence of urgency/business expediency, acceptance of loan in cash in excess of Rs.20,000/- from the relatives would ipso facto constitute bonafide belief that it would not attract provisions of Section 269SS ?
(iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in the absence of urgency/business expediency, acceptance of loan in cash in excess of Rs.20,000/- from the relatives would constitute 'reasonable cause' under Section 273B ?
Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)
//True copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
dixit
To
TCA No.1159 OF 2009
MR(CO) GMY(08/01/2019)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tax Case Appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the ITAT is maintainable.
Whether the appeal proceeds under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act amidst a Circular instruction limiting appeals based on tax effect.
Consequences of the tax effect being less than the monetary limit imposed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.
4 provisions across 1 enactments
Commissioner of Income Tax, Tiruchirapalli
Shri K.Premanathan
Vineet Kothari
Anita Sumanth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
