Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Alpump Ltd on 17 August, 2022
T.C.A.Nos.585 to 588 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 Nos.585 to 588 of 2018
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Chennai .. Appellant in all T.C.As
Vs.
M/s.Alpump Ltd.
No.17-172, Industrial Estate
Perungudi
Chennai 600 096
PAN : AACCA5365M .. Respondent in all T.C.As
Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
against the common order dated 27.10.2016 passed by the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, in respective I.T.A.Nos.30/Mds/2013,
31/Mds/2013, 32/Mds/2013 and 33/Mds/2013.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar
in all T.C.As Standing Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/4
T.C.A.Nos.585 to 588 of 2018
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.)
These tax case appeals have been filed by the appellant/Revenue, calling
in question the correctness of the common order dated 27.10.2016 passed by
the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, in respective
I.T.A.Nos.30/Mds/2013, 31/Mds/2013, 32/Mds/2013 and 33/Mds/2013, for the
respective assessment years 2003-04 to 2006-07.
2. By order dated 13.11.2018, this Court admitted the aforesaid tax case
appeals on the following substantial questions of law :
“(i) Whether the brought forward depreciation and the
business losses of the amalgamated company are to be allowed
especially when the assessee failed to submit the requisite Form
62 along with the return of income as mandated under Section
72A(2)(ii) read with Rule 9C(b) of the Income Tax Rules?
(ii) Whether the surplus of assets received over and above
the face value of the shares issued consequent to amalgamation
of M/s.Gray Cast P. Ltd., with that of the assessee's company are
receipts falling under capital field or is to be treated as income
under Section 28(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? and
(iii) Whether a sum of Rs.84.92 lakhs transferred by the
assessee company to its general reserve consequent to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/4
T.C.A.Nos.585 to 588 of 2018
amalgamation is taxable under Section 28(iv) of the Income Tax
Act, 1961?”
3. When these matters were taken up for consideration, the learned
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 appeals 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
these appeals are less than the threshold limit.
4. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel
for the appellant/Revenue, the present appeals, wherein, the tax effect is said to
be less than the monetary limit imposed, are dismissed as withdrawn, keeping
open the substantial questions of law for determination in appropriate cases.
No costs.
[R.M.D,J.] [M.S.Q, J.]
17.08.2022
gya
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.Nos.585 to 588 of 2018
AND
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
gya
To
1.The Commissioner of Income Tax
Chennai
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Company Circle-I(1)
Chennai
3.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IX
Chennai
4.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
'B' Bench, Chennai
T.C.A.Nos.585 to 588 of 2018
17.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
