Dismissed

The Commisisoner of Income Tax v. Madura Coats Ltd.

Madras HC22 Jun 2018TCA/473/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tamil Nadu High Court dismissed a tax case appeal raising a question of law regarding Eligibility for Fee Extra Shift Allowance. The court held that the question did not arise for consideration on the facts and decided not to decide the legal question, leaving it open.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed on the ground that the question of law did not arise for consideration on the facts of the case; question of law left open.

The Commisisoner of Income Tax Vs Madura Coats Ltd. — Income Tax | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated: 22.06.2018

¶4

Coram

¶5

The Honourable Mr.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH and

¶6

The Honourable Mrs.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶7

Tax Case (Appeal) No.473 of 2010

¶8

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai. ... Appellant Vs.

¶9

Madura Coats Ltd., New Jail Road, Madurai-625 001. ... Respondent

¶10

Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench dated 02.04.2001 in ITA.No.322/Mds/1988.

¶11

For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan Standing Counsel for Income Tax

¶12

For Respondent : Ms.Manasa for M/s King & Partridge

¶13

J U D G M E N T

¶14

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)

¶15

The Revenue has filed this appeal as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench dated 02.04.2001 in ITA.No.322/Mds/1988 relating to the assessment years 1985-1986.

¶16

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶17

¶18

This Court admitted the above Tax case Appeal on 22.06.2010

¶19

on the following question of law:-

¶20

" Whether on the facts and circumstances of the

¶21

case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the power house will come within the scope of the expression “other stationery plant” under item III (iv)(i) of Appendix-I to the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and is eligible for fee extra shift allowance?

¶22

A perusal of the question of law framed and also raised would

¶23

show that they did not even arise for consideration on the facts of the

¶24

case. When this query was put to the counsels, they also acknowledged the said position. In such view of the same, the tax case appeal stands dismissed and we make it clear that we are not going into the question of law as framed, which is accordingly left open to be decided in the appropriate case. No costs.

¶25

Index:Yes/No

¶26

raa

¶27

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶28

¶29

¶30

1.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Cir.-II, Madurai.

¶31

2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) I, Madurai.

¶32

3.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench A, Chennai.

¶33

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶34

¶35

M.M.SUNDRESH, J. and N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

¶36

raa

¶37

T.C.(A) No.473 of 2010
22.06.2018

¶38

http://www.judis.nic.in

The Commisisoner of Income Tax v. Madura Coats Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Commisisoner of Income Tax v. Madura Coats Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Kaliaperumal, Vs State of Tamilnadu

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Shri S.P.Natarajan

The Commissioner of Income Vs M/S Soliton Technologies

R.Subramaniam Vs the Official Liquidator

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S Abdul Wahid &* Co.

M/S Mustang Trading & Vs the Assistant Commissioner