Dismissed

Commissioner of Income Tax v. M.M.Forgings Ltd.

Madras HC1 Sept 2021TCA/39/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal filed by Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act against the ITAT order quashing a CIT action invoking Section 263. Appeal dismissed due to low tax effect under Circular No. 17/2019; question of law left open with liberty to restore if effect exceeds threshold.

What did the court decide?

Tax Case Appeal dismissed; question of law left open with liberty to the Revenue to restore the appeal if tax effect exceeds the threshold.

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M.M.Forgings Ltd. — Income Tax | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 01.09.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP

¶6

T.C.A.NO.39 OF 2009

¶7

Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai.

¶8

 ... Appellant
Vs.

¶9

MM Forgings Ltd.
Guindy House,
95, Anna Salai,
Chennai-32.

¶10

 ... Respondent

¶11

Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Madras 'B' Bench dated 12.08.2008 in ITA No.370/mds/2008
relating to the Assessment Year 2000-01. Against the order of
the Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai – III, Chennai – 34
dated 17.12.2007 in C.No.3033/18/III/06-07 and against the order
of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle
IV(3), Chennai – 34 dated 15.04.2005 in PAN/GIR.No.
AAACM2164L/MM-2 for the Assessment Year 2000 – 2001.

¶12

For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan
 Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent: Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar

¶13

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

¶14

J U D G M E N T

¶15

(Judgment was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)

¶16

We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior
Standing Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.M.P.Senthil
Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee.

¶17

2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of
the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for brevity) is directed
against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras
'B' Bench dated 12.08.2008 in ITA No.370/mds/2008 relating to
the Assessment Year 2000-01.

¶18

3.The appeal was admitted on 04.03.2009 on the following
substantial question of law:

¶19

“1)Whether on the facts and circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was right in quashing the
order of the CIT passed under Section 263 by
invoking the clause (c) to explanation on the
presumption that the issue regarding the
allowability of deduction under section 80I to the
assessee in respect of the new unit of plant II for
the eleventh assessment year 2000-01 was before
CIT(A) for consideration?"

¶20

4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant
submits that the above appeal is not pursued by the Revenue on
account of the Low Tax Effect in terms of Circular No.17/2019
dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. By
the said Circular, the monetary limit for filing or pursuing an
appeal before the High Court has been increased to Rs.1 Crore.
It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is less
than the threshold limit.

¶21

5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax
Case Appeal is dismissed on account of the Low Tax Effect. The
substantial question of law framed is left open. In the event
the tax effect in this case is above the threshold limit fixed

¶22

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

¶23

in the said Circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to
make a mention to this Court to restore the appeal to be heard
and decided on merits. No costs.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)

¶26

// True Copy //

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

Sgl/mka

¶29

To

¶30

1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,

¶31

Madras, “B” Bench.

¶32

2. The Commissioner of Income Tax,

¶33

Chennai III, Chennai.

¶34

3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle IV(3), Chennai – 34.

¶35

4. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai.

¶36

+1cc to Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.44030

¶37

T.C.A.No.39 of 2009

¶38

AJS(CO)

¶39

RLP(23/09/2021)

¶40

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

Commissioner of Income Tax v. M.M.Forgings Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Commissioner of Income Tax v. M.M.Forgings Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A. Tameem Ansari Vs Veeraraghava Rao

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs T. Mathimaran No. 3, 106/D2

M/S.Madras Race Club Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt.Ltd Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Saint Gobain Glass India Ltd., Vs the Appellate Joint Commissioner (Ct)

Commissioner of Income Vs M/S. L & T Housing Finance Ltd.