Dismissed

The Commissioner of v. M/S.Pharma & Vijay Investment

Madras HC5 Dec 2018TCA/122/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Revenue filed a Tax Case Appeal under Section 260A challenging the Tribunal's holding that Section 147 assessment was invalid without an earlier Section 143(3) assessment. Citing a CBDT circular restricting appeals under Rs.50 lakhs, the court dismissed the appeal as not pressed while keeping the legal questions open.

What did the court decide?

The appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed.

The Commissioner of Vs M/S.Pharma & Vijay Investment — Income Tax | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 05.12.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI

¶5

AND THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶6

Tax Case Appeal No.122 of 2009

¶7

Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai.

¶8

.. Appellant/Respondent

¶9

Vs.

¶10

M/s. Parma & Vijay Investment & Finance Co. Pvt. Ltd. 3, Vijayaraghava Chari Road Chennai 600 017. .. Respondent/Appellant

¶11

Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, dated 06.8.2008 in ITA No.400/Mds/2007. Against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-V, Chennai-600 034 dated 26.10.2006 made in ITA.No.413 of 2005-2006 and against the Assessment Order passed by the Assitant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle V(1), Chennai, dated 30.11.2005 made in PAN/GIR.No.AAACP3722H/51074-P.

¶12

For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravi Kumar Senior Standing Counsel

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan

¶14

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 'B' Bench, dated 06.8.2008 in ITA No.400/Mds/2007, by raising the following substantial question of law:

¶15

"Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

assessment under Section 147 was invalid in view of the proviso to Section 14A even though there had been no earlier assessment under Section 143(3) to treat it as a re-assessment?"

¶18

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Standing Counsel brought to our notice the Circular instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.7.2018 wherein it is stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.50 lakhs.

¶19

In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in an appropriate case.

¶20

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

¶21

kpl To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Madras.

¶22

1. The Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-V, Chennai.

¶23

1. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle V(1) Chennai.

¶24

+1cc to Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.83857 +1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan, Advocate, S.R.No.84140 TCA No.122 of 2009

¶25

EV(CO) CS/08/01/2019

¶26

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

The Commissioner of v. M/S.Pharma & Vijay Investment

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Commissioner of v. M/S.Pharma & Vijay Investment

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S M.P.Narayanan

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S M.P.Narayanan

The Commissioner of I.T Vs Bannari Amman Spinning Mills

P.Yuvaraaj, Vs The District Collector

Commissioner of I.T Vs Maars Software International

Jessie Memorial Trust Vs the Commr. of I.T