Madras High Court
Principal Commissioner Of Income ... vs Vandana on 25 July, 2022
T.C.A.No.315 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.07.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
T.C.A.No.315 of 2021
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,
Corporate Ward-4(1),
Chennai - 600 034. ... Appellant
Versus
Vandana
... Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
against the order dated 31.01.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1033/Chny/2019.
For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan
Standing Counsel
For Respondent : No appearance
Page 1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.315 of 2021
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.)
This tax case appeal has been filed by the appellant / Revenue,
challenging the order dated 31.01.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.1033/Chny/2019, relating to the
assessment year 2015-16.
2.By order dated 14.06.2021, this court admitted the aforesaid tax case
appeal on the following substantial questions of law:
“(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case
and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right and
justified in setting aside the order passed by the Assessing
Officer to re-examine the matter when the Assessing Officer
has already duly examined the matter before passing the
assessment order.
(ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case
and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right and
justified in not dismissing the appeal of the assessee as done by
the ITAT "A" Bench, Chennai in ITA.No.827/CHNY/2019 dated
11.06.2019 in the case of Smt.Rekha Jain, and by ITAT
Page 2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.315 of 2021
"C" Bench, Chennai in ITA.No.3009/Chny/2018 in the case of
Harish Kumar HUF, when the facts and circumstances of those
cases are exactly similar to the present case.
(iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case
and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right and
justified in remitting the issue back to the file of the Assessing
Officer and shifting the onus to the Revenue with a direction
that the Assessing Officer shall bring on record the role of the
assessee in promoting the company and the relationship of the
assessee, if any with the promoters, role of the assessee in
inflating the price of share etc."
3.When the matter was 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 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.
Page 3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.315 of 2021
4.In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned 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.)
25.07.2022
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
av
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
“A” Bench, Chennai.
2. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,
Corporate Ward-4(1),
Chennai - 600 034.
3. The Income Tax Officer,
Non Corporate Circle - 9(5),
Chennai.
4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - X,
Chennai.
Page 4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.315 of 2021
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
av
T.C.A.No.315 of 2021
25.07.2022
Page 5/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
