Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs M/S. Shriram Towertech Ltd on 20 June, 2022
TCA.Nos.176 to 179 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.06.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
T.C.A.Nos.176 to 179 of 2014 &
M.P.Nos.1,1,1 of 2014
Commissioner of Income-tax,
Chennai ... Appellant in all appeals
Versus
M/s. Shriram Towertech Ltd.,
No.18/3, Sigappiachi Building,
1st Floor, Rukmani Lashmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008. ... Respondent in all appeals
Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260 A of the Income Tax
Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras
“A” Bench, dated 29.4.2013 in ITA.Nos.1394, 1395, /Mds/2011,
CO.No.157/Mds/2011 in ITA.No.1394/Mds/2011 & CO.No.156/Mds/2011
in ITA.No.1395/Mds/2011.
For Appellant in all appeals : Mr. J. Narayanaswamy
Standing Counsel
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TCA.Nos.176 to 179 of 2014
For Respondent in all appeals : Mr. R. Sivaraman
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.)
These Tax Case Appeals have been filed by the appellant / revenue,
questioning the correctness of the order dated 29.04.2013 passed by the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Chennai in ITA.Nos.1394,
1395,/Mds/2011, CO.No.157/Mds/2011 in ITA.No.1394/Mds/2011 &
CO.No.156/Mds/2011 in ITA.No.1395/Mds/2011.
2. On 23.3.2015, the appeals were admitted by this Court raising the
following substantial questions of law;
'1. Whether on facts and circumstances of the
case, the Tribunal was right in directing the
Assessing Officer to work out the gross profit on the
disputed purchases of Rs.1,15,17,967/- from M/s.
Sambhav Steel Distributors at the rate of 6% and
add the same to the income of the assessee, when
based on material evidences the Assessing Officer
had disallowed the purchase as bogus?
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TCA.Nos.176 to 179 of 2014
2. Whether on facts and circumstances of the
case, the Tribunal was right in directing the
Assessing Officer to work out the gross profit on
the disputed purchases of Rs.75,89,252/- from
M/s. Sambhav Steel Distributors and
Rs.1,98,92,750/- from M/s. Southern Power Tech
Equipment P. Ltd. totalling to Rs.2,74,82,002/- at
the rate of 6% and add the same to the income of
the assessee, when based on material evidences
the Assessing Officer had disallowed the
purchase as bogus?
'
3. When the 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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TCA.Nos.176 to 179 of 2014
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. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous
petitions are closed.
[R.M.D,J.] [M.S.Q., J.]
20.06.2022
msr
Index : Yes / No
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TCA.Nos.176 to 179 of 2014
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
AND
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
msr
T.C.A.Nos.176 to 179 of 2014 &
M.P.Nos.1,1,1 of 2014
20.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
