Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Murasoli Maran Family Trust on 17 August, 2022
T.C.A.No.424 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 17.08.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
Tax Case Appeal No.424 of 2018
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Chennai .. Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Murasoli Maran Family Trust
No.4, II Avenue, Boat Club Road
R.A.Puram, Chennai 600 028
PAN : AAA TM0863H .. Respondent
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
against the order dated 31.01.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.2663/Mds/2016.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Ms.N.Sneha
for Mr.J.Ravindran
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/4
T.C.A.No.424 of 2018
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.)
This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant/Revenue, calling in
question the correctness of the order dated 31.01.2017 passed by the Income
Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.2663/Mds/2016,
relating to the assessment year 2005-06, by raising the following substantial
questions of law :
“1. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the
benefit u/s.161 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is to be allowed
especially when the Trust has supposedly ceased to exists?
2. Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad especially when
the Trust is to be assessed as AOP at the maximum marginal
rate as provided u/s.167 of the Income Tax Act when only one
Trustee was available and two beneficiaries who attended the
meeting had passed a resolution which is invalid based on which
no benefits can be granted?
3. Whether the reasoning and finding of the Tribunal is
proper by holding that 3 trustees were present on the date of
passing of the resolution which fact is factually incorrect and
wrong and is contrary to the covenants in the Trust Deed which
clearly indicated that the 2 trustees who were on record alone
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.424 of 2018
were capable of passing valid resolutions and since only one
trustee attended the meeting when the resolutions were passed
they could not acted upon and therefore were invalid?”
3. When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned Standing
Counsel for the appellant/Revenue brought to the notice of this court the
Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019, issued by the Central Board Direct
Taxes, wherein, it is stipulated that appeal 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). It is also submitted that the tax effect in
this appeal is less than the threshold limit.
4. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned Standing
Counsel for the appellant/Revenue, the present appeal, wherein, the tax effect is
said to be less than the monetary limit imposed, is dismissed as withdrawn,
keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in an
appropriate case. No costs.
[R.M.D,J.] [M.S.Q, J.]
17.08.2022
Internet : Yes
gya
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.424 of 2018
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
AND
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
gya
To
1.The Commissioner of Income Tax
Chennai
2.The Income Tax Officer
Non-Corporate Ward 1(3)
Chennai 600 034
3.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2
Chennai
4.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
'B' Bench, Chennai Tax Case Appeal No.424 of 2018
17.08.2022
(1/2)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
