Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 19790 Mad
Judgement Date : 21 October, 2024
T.C.A.No.174 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.10.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
Tax Case Appeal No.174 of 2024
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3
Corporate Ward 6(1), 121, Nungambakkam
High Road, Chennai 600 034. .... Appellant
Vs.
Sunsmart Technologies Pvt Ltd
25, Yellow Buildings, 25, RK Salai
V Floor, Opp.HSBC Bank, Mylapore
Chennai 600 004
PAN : AAJCS7454C .... Respondent
-----
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench Chennai,
dated 31.10.2023 made in I.T.A.No.173/Chny/2023.
For Appellant : Mr.J.Narayanaswamy
Senior Standing Counsel
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)
This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue calling in question
the correctness of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai by raising the following substantial questions of law:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was right in law in quashing the revision order u/s.263 of the Income Tax Act without regard to the set judicial precedents of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Delhi High Court?
2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT has erred in quashing the revision order U/s.263 when the PCIT after verification of the records found that no verification / enquiry was made by the AO about the claim of expenses of Rs.2,13,11,528/- paid to M/s.SSG Technologies LLC, Dubai as per the agreement and therefore the said assessment order is covered by clause(a) to Explanation 2 to Section 263 making it an order deemed to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue?
3. Whether the ITAT was right in law in quashing the revision order u/s.263 which is a power by way of remedial action in-built into the Act, to arrest leakage of revenue based on Revenue Audit Objection?
2. By the impugned order passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax
Act by the Revisional Authority, the matter has been remanded originally to the
assessing authority, where the proposed tax, even if it is imposed, would be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
less than the tax effect as per the CBDT's Circular No.9 of 2024 dated
17.09.2024.
3. Therefore, this Tax Case Appeal is dismissed for low tax effect,
keeping open the substantial questions of law for adjudication at appropriate
stage. No costs.
(R.S.K.,J.) (C.S.N.,J.)
21.10.2024
NCS : Yes/No
KST
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.SURESH KUMAR, J.
AND C.SARAVANAN, J.
KST
21.10.2024
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!