Dismissed

The Commissioner of v. M/S.Kumbakonam Mutual

Madras HC18 Dec 2018TCA/505/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed an appeal filed by the Revenue against an order allowing a deduction of Rs.73.38 lacs for hypothetical interest income under the accrual system. The High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal as not pressed following Circular No.3/2018, due to the tax effect being below Rs.50 lakhs, though the legal question remains open.

What did the court decide?

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

The Commissioner of Vs M/S.Kumbakonam Mutual — Income Tax | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 18.12.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶5

Tax Case Appeal No.505 of 2009

¶6

Commissioner of Income Tax Kumbakonam. .... Appellant Vs.

¶7

Kumbakonam Mutual Benefit Fund Ltd., TSR Big St., Kumbakonam. .... Respondent

¶8

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 30.10.2008 made in ITA No.661/Mds/2007 for the assessment year 2003-04.

¶9

Against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Tiruchirappalli, dated 14.11.2006 made in I.T.A.No.113/CIT(A)/TRY/2006-2007 against the Assessment order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-I, Kumbakonam dated 31.03.2006 made in G.I.No.8020-T/AADFT0308D for the Assessment year 2003-04.

¶10

For Respondent : Mr.Venkat Narayanan

¶11

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 30.10.2008 made in ITA No.661/Mds/2007 for the assessment year 2003-04 by raising the following substantial question of law:

¶12

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

¶13

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that a sum of Rs.73.38 lacs had to allowed as deduction on the ground that the said interest income was not received and tax cannot be levied on hypothecal income, even though the assessee was following accrual system of accounting?"

¶14

When the matter is taken up for admission, 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.

¶15

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 question of law for determination in an appropriate
case.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
sl
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench,
Chennai.
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),
Tiruchirappalli.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-I,
Kumbakonam.
+1 cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate Sr.No.88075
+1 cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan, Advocate Sr.No.88236

¶16

TCA No.505 of 2009

¶17

CSL/21.01.2019

¶18

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

The Commissioner of v. M/S.Kumbakonam Mutual

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Commissioner of v. M/S.Kumbakonam Mutual

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

M/S Super Spinng Mills Ltd. Vs the Asst Commissioner

A.M.Ponnusamy Vs The District Collector

Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Joint Dy. Commr. of

C.Soundhararajan Vs The Secretary

The Commissioner of Vs Sri Sm Palaniappa Chettiar

Integrated Finance Co. Ltd. Vs the Deputy Commissioner of