Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs The All India Skin & Hide on 22 April, 2021
T.C.A.No.62 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
T.C.A.No.62 of 2016
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant
Vs.
The All India Skin & hide
Tanners and Merchant
Association, No.43 (old 53)
Raja Muthiah Road, Periamet,
Chennai – 600 003. ... Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras,
“A” Bench, dated 06.06.2014 in I.TA.No.1751/Mds/2013, Assessment
Year 2009-10.
For Appellant : Mr.J.Narayanaswamy
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.G.Baskar
Page 1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.62 of 2016
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
We have heard Mr.J.Naryanaswamy learned Senior Standing
Counsel for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.G.Baskar, learned counsel for
the respondent/assessee.
2.The appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed against the order
dated 06.06.2014 made in I.TA.No.1751/Mds/2013 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “A” Bench (for brevity, the
Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2009-10.
3.The appeal was admitted on 15.02.2016 on the following
substantial questions of law:
“1.Whether on the facts and circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding
that the society is eligible for exemption under
Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, in complete
Page 2/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.62 of 2016
disregard to the facts of the case and provisions of
newly inserted provisos to Section 2(15) of the
Income Tax Act?
2.Whether on the facts and circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding
that the activities of the assessee society are
governed under 'principles of mutuality' even though
the society is registered under Section 12AA of the
Income Tax Act as a 'charitable entity' and has been
claiming that status all along, more so when Kerala
High Court in the case of M/s.Investors Club,
Trichur vs. CIT [318 ITR 427 (Ker.)] has clearly
held that a 'charitable institution' cannot raise the
'plea of mutuality'?
3.Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case and in law, the order of
the Tribunal was not against the principle of
'judicial consistency' in as much as it was passed in
disregard of the findings of its earlier order in ITA
Nos.2749, 2750 and 2751/Mds/1994 for assessment
years 1998-99, 1990-91 and 1991-92 where a clear
finding had been given that the assessee's activities
Page 3/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.62 of 2016
are in the nature of 'advancement of objects of
general public utility' and such decision had already
reached finality? And
4.Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in
law in holding that reference made by the Assessing
Officer to the D.I.T.(E) has statutory powers to
cancel the registration under Section 12AA(3), if he
is satisfied that the activities of the society are not
genuine or are not being carried out in accordance
with the objects, more so when such an order is yet
to be passed?”
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.
Page 4/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.62 of 2016
5.In the light of the said submissions, the above Tax Case Appeal
is dismissed as withdrawn on account of the Low Tax Effect. The
substantial questions of law framed are left open. In the event the tax
effect in this case is above the threshold limit fixed 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.
[M.D., J.] [K.R., J.]
22.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
mkn
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “A” Bench
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai.
Page 5/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.62 of 2016
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
mkn
T.C.A.No.62 of 2016
22.04.2021
Page 6/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
