Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 9912 Mad
Judgement Date : 13 June, 2022
T.C.A.No.578 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.06.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
T.C.A.No.578 of 2017
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2,
No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,
Chennai 600 034. ... Appellant
Versus
S.P.Nandakumar ...
Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, “C” Bench,
dated 23.06.2016 in I.TA.No.2137/Mds/2015.
For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan
Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.S.Sridhar
Page 1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.C.A.No.578 of 2017
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 23.06.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.2137/Mds/2015, relating to the
assessment year 2011-12.
2. By order dated 07.12.2017, this court admitted the aforesaid tax
case appeal on the following substantial questions of law:
“(i) Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that land, on which, the tea factory with its machinery is located and let out to a partnership firm for doing business can be treated as agricultural land and claimed exempt under Section 2(14)(iii)(a)(b) of the Income Tax Act? and
(ii) Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding the land as agricultural land, when Rule 8 of the Income Tax Rules provided for treating the income from sale of tea grown and manufactured by seller as business income?"
Page 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.578 of 2017
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.
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to be less than the monetary limit imposed, is dismissed as withdrawn,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 question of law for determination in an
appropriate case. No costs.
(R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q., J.)
13.06.2022
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
psa/av
Page 3/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.No.578 of 2017
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
psa/av
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Chennai,
2. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2, No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai 600 034.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Business Ward XIV(4), Chennai.
4. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) - 7, Chennai.
T.C.A.No.578 of 2017
13.06.2022
Page 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!