High Court dismissed appeals filed by the Revenue on a non-substantive grounds. due to the tax effect being below the monetary limit, dismissing the appeals as withdrawn without determining the substantial question of law.
Appeals dismissed as withdrawn due to tax effect being below permissible monetary limit.
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: 5.9.2019
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
Tax Case No.166 & 167 of 2007
Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai. Appellant Vs. M/s.Soundararajan & Co. 121, Tank Bund Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. Respondent
Tax Cases filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 10.3.2006 made in ITA Nos.931/Mds/2001 and 932/Mds/2001 against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-XIII,Chennai 34 dated 29.03.2001 made in ITA.NOS.158/2000-20001, 159/2000-2001 for the assessment year 1997-1998, 1999-2000 against the order of the Income Tax officer,TDS IV, Chennai dated 28.08.2000 for the Assessment Years 1997-1998,1999-2000. For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Mr.Rajesh, Jr. Standing Counsel COMMON JUDGMENT (Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J)
These Tax Cases have been filed by the Revenue, calling in question the correctness of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, 10.3.2006 made in ITA Nos.931/Mds/2001 and 932/Mds/2001, for the Assessment Years 1997-1998 and 1999-2000, by raising the following substantial question of law:
"Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source on interest payments in respect of loans taken?"
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(insp cell)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ssk.
To
1. Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals)-XIII,
Chennai 34.
2. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
'B' Bench, Chennai.
3. The Income Tax Officer (TDS-IV)
Chennai.
Tax Case Nos.166 & 167 of 2007
PM
A.SK(08/11/2019)
Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai
M/s.Soundararajan & Co.
VINEET KOTHARI
SARAVANAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
