Revenue appeal against Tribunal order on taxability of agricultural land sale proceeds was dismissed on low tax effect grounds under CBDT Circular No.9/2024, the court rejecting the audit-objection exception argument, with substantial questions of law kept open.
None; appeal dismissed under low tax effect, questions of law kept open, no costs.
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.
T.C.A.No.220 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.11.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN
T.C.A.No.220 of 2015
The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai.
.. Appellant
Vs.
A.A.Parveen .. Respondent
Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras
“A” Bench dated 09.05.2014 passed in I.T.A.No.982/CHNY/2013.
For the Appellant : Mr.J.Narayanaswamy Senior Standing Counsel For the Respondent : Mr.T.Vasudevan
JUDGMENT
(Order of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)
The present tax case appeal was admitted on 13.07.2015 on
the following substantial questions of law:-
"1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the sale proceeds of vacant land was agricultural in nature and not liable to tax in the absence of any contemporaneous
Page 1 of 8
T.C.A.No.220 of 2015
documents/evidences produced by the assessee?
2. Whether the Tribunal was right in upholding the order of CIT(A) who deleted the additions made by the Assessing Officer under the head long term capital gains by holding that the assets transferred by the assessee was agricultural land which is exempt from the tax in view of Section 2(14)?
3. Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad especially when the land sold was situated at Kazhipattur Village which is located within 8 kms from Sholinganallur and the area falls within its Town Panchayat and even if it is agricultural nature the gain on transfer thereof will be eligible to capital gain tax?"
Page 2 of 8
T.C.A.No.220 of 2015
“2. At the outset, Mr.Avinash Krishnan Ravi, learned counsel appearing for the appellant / Revenue submits that, though the monetary limit is less than the tax effect as per the recent CBDT's Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024, the exception clauses which are available in Para Nos.3.1 and 3.2 of the earlier Circular in Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024 would mutatis mutandis be made applicable to this Circular also. Under Para Nos. 3.1 and 3.2 of the said circular No.5, the circumstances of exceptions are provided, where even low tax effect appeals can be preferred either before the Tribunal or before the High Court or before the Supreme Court.
3. Insofar as this case is concerned, according to the learned counsel for the appellant, there has been an audit objection, based on which alone the assessment order since has been passed, that issue is one of the exception clauses covered under Para 3.1 of the Circular dated 15.03.2024. Therefore, even though it is a case of low tax effect on the quantification of tax, still the Revenue can present the appeal notwithstanding anything contained in Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024. Hence, the learned counsel for the Revenue seeks admission of this case by taking into consideration the said submission made by
Page 3 of 8
T.C.A.No.220 of 2015
him.
4. In order to have a ready reference of Para 3.1 and 3.2 of the Circular No.5 of 2024 dated
5. Many circumstances have been given for filing appeals before the forums like the Tribunal, High
Page 4 of 8
T.C.A.No.220 of 2015
Court or Supreme Court, if the monetary limit even though is less than the tax limit as per Circular No.9 of 2024, still appeals can be filed in case of exceptions provided under Para 3.1 or 3.2 of Circular No.5 of 2024 as stated supra.
6. However, on a careful perusal of Paras 3.1 and 3.2 of the Circular, we do not find any circumstance to show that audit objection is one of such circumstance under which there is an exception where appeals can be filed even under low tax effect for pursuing the matter before the appellate forum including this Court.
7. No such circumstance as mentioned in Paras 3.1 and 3.2 of Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024 is available in this case. Similar to the said circular, Para 10 of Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 reads as follows:
"10. Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in Para 3 above or there is no tax effect:
(a) Where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule is under challenge, or (b) Where Board's order, Notification, Instruction or Circular has been held to be illegal or ultra
Page 5 of 8
T.C.A.No.220 of 2015
vires, or
8. Though Circular No.3 dated 11.07.2018 has been superseded by Circular No.5 dated 15.03.2024, since similar exceptions have been provided in Circular No.5 dated 15.03.2024 in Paras 3.1 and 3.2, which we have extracted herein above, where also there is no such exception, such as audit objection, provided, and therefore the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant has to be rejected.
9. We do not find any merits in the contentions made by the learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue to entertain this appeal as admittedly it comes under the low tax effect as per the recent Circular No.9 dated 17.09.2024. In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to entertain this appeal. Hence it is dismissed as it comes under low tax effect and the questions of law that have been framed in this appeal by the Revenue / Appellant would be decided at a later point of time in an appropriate case. No costs.”
Page 6 of 8
T.C.A.No.220 of 2015
(R.S.K., J.) (C.S.N, J) 12.11.2024
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
drm
Page 7 of 8
T.C.A.No.220 of 2015
R. SURESH KUMAR, J. AND C. SARAVANAN, J.
(drm)
T.C.A.No.220 of 2015
12.11.2024
Page 8 of 8
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai
A.A.Parveen
R. Suresh Kumar
C. Saravanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
