Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Mermaid Properties P Ltd on 6 July, 2021
T.C.A.No.943 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
T.C.A.No.943 of 2013
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Mermaid Properties P Ltd.,
1-C, JVL Towers,
117, Nelson Manickam Road,
Chennai – 600 029. ... Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras,
“C” Bench, dated 23.01.2013 in I.TA.No.1897/Mds/2012, Assessment
Year 2007-08.
For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan
Senior Standing Counsel
and Mr.S.Rajesh
Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.R.Sivaraman
Page 1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.943 of 2013
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
We have heard Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing
Counsel and Mr.S.Rajesh, learned Standing Counsel for the
appellant/Revenue and Mr.R.Sivaraman, 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 23.01.2013 made in I.TA.No.1897/Mds/2012 on the file of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “C” Bench (for brevity, the
Tribunal) for the Assessment Year 2007-08.
3.The appeal was admitted on 14.02.2014 on the following
substantial questions of law:
“1.Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Tribunal
was right in upholding the order of Commissioner of
Page 2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.943 of 2013
Income Tax (Appeals) who held that the transfer of
land amounted to capital gains and not as income
from adventure in the nature of trade?
2.Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in
not considering the fact that the transaction was an
adventure in the nature of trade liable for tax under
the head 'income from business'?”
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.
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
Page 3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.943 of 2013
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.] [R.H., J.]
06.07.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
mkn
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “C” Bench
Page 4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.943 of 2013
M.DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R. HEMALATHA, J.
mkn
T.C.A.No.943 of 2013
06.07.2021
Page 5/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
