The Madras High Court dismissed a tax case appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A IT Act because the tax effect was less than the Rs.50 lakhs limit mandated by Circular No.3/2018, declining to decide the substantial question of law.
Appeal dismissed as not pressed due to low tax effect.
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: 20.12.2018
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
The Commissioner of Income Tax Coimbatore.
M/s.Shiva Texyam Ltd., (Formerly known as Annamalai Finance Ltd.), 252, Mettupalayam Road, Coimbatore – 641 043.
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench, Chennai, dated 09.01.2009 made in ITA.No.663/(Mds)/2007 for the assessment year 2001-02, against the proceedings of the Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Coimbatore in C.No.120(14)/04-05/CIT I/CBE dated 12/1/2006 against the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle-I(2), Coimbatore in PAN/GIR.No.AABCA6617M/A-23 dated 19/3/2004 for the Assessment Year 2001-2002.
For Respondent : Mr.R.Venkatanarayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan
(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, Madras 'D' Bench, Chennai, dated
09.01.2009 made in ITA.No.663/(Mds)/2007 for the assessment year 2001-02 by raising the following substantial question of law:
" Whether on the facts and in the circumstances
of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in quashing the order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, even though the assessing officer without application of mind passed an order would be erroneous if it is based on an incorrect assumption of facts or incorrect application of law or based on no insufficient materials?”
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, 67A Race Course Road, Coimbatore-18.
3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle I(2), Coimbatore. +1cc to M/S.Subbaraya Aiyar, Advocate Sr.89598 +1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate Sr.89267 TC (A) No.624 of 2009 rk[co] srg 25/01/2019
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Revenue can file a tax case appeal under Section 260A when the tax effect is below the monetary limit of Rs.50 lakhs stipulated in Circular No.3/2018.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX COIMBATORE
MS.SHIVA TEXYAM LTD.
VINEET KOTHARI
ANITA SUMANTH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
