Dismissed

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nepc Agro Foods Ltd.

Madras HC9 Sept 2019TC/2051/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the Income Tax Appellant's appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Citing Circular No.17/2019, the court observed that the tax effect did not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- and thus the appeal was not pressed by the Revenue.

What did the court decide?

The appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed under the guidelines of Circular No.17/2019.

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Nepc Agro Foods Ltd. — Income Tax | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09.09.2019

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI

¶6

and

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶8

T.C.(A).No.2051 of 2008
Commissioner of Income Tax
Chennai. ... Appellant
..Vs..
NEPC Agro Foods Ltd
36 Wallajah Road
Chennai 600 002. ... Respondent

¶9

Prayer : Tax Cases (Appeal) are filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench, dated 25.01.2008 passed in I.T.A.No. /500/Mds/98 for Assessment Year 1994-1995.

¶10

For Appellant : Mr.V.Rajesh Senior Standing Counsel

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.R.Sivaraman

¶12

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶13

¶14

J U D G M E N T

¶15

(Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J.)

¶16

This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue calling in question

¶17

the correctness of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 25.01.2008, in I.T.A.No./500/Mds/98 by raising the following substantial questions of law:

¶18

"1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of t he case,

¶19

the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled

¶20

to the benefit of Sec.80IA merely on the ground that it had availed it in the last year without going into the facts and circumstances of the present year?

¶21

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case,

¶22

the Tribunal was right in holding that the opening stock should

¶23

be deducted from the closing stock and only the difference should be added when the opening stock is already taken into

¶24

account to arrive at the closing stock in the first place?

¶25

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel for the Department brought to our notice the Circular instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No.17/2019, dated 8^th

¶26

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶27

¶28

August,2019, 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.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore).

¶29

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 appropriate cases. No costs.
(V.K.,J.) (C.S.N.,J.)
09.09.2019
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
arr
To
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench
Chennai.

¶30

DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI,J and

¶31

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶32

¶33

MR. JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN,J

¶34

arr

¶35

T.C.A.No.2051 of 2008
09.09.2019

¶36

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶37

¶38

http://www.judis.nic.in

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nepc Agro Foods Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nepc Agro Foods Ltd.

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 Incometax Vs Shri S.Ramasamy

The Commissioner of Incometax Vs Shri S.Ramasamy

The Commissioner of Incometax Vs Shri S.Velammal

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S Caim Energy India Pvt. Ltd.

Commissioer of Income Tax Vs M/S. Arun Textiles Pvt. Ltd.

Principal Commissioner of Vs Point Textiles (P) Ltd.