Madras High Court
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Emerald Jewel Industry India Ltd on 23 October, 2024
Bench: R.Suresh Kumar, C.Saravanan
T.C.A.No.226 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.10.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
Tax Case Appeal No.226 of 2022
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore. .... Appellant
Vs.
Emerald Jewel Industry India Ltd.,
230, T.V.Samy Road (East)
R.S.Puram, Coimbatore. .... Respondent
-----
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench Chennai,
dated 11.01.2018 in ITA.No.684/MDS/2015.
For Appellant : Mrs.V.Pushpa
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Sriraman
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:
1 of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
For AY 2010-11
1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case,
the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in holding that the
assessee is eligible for exemption u/s.11 of the IT
Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that there is
a complete mismatch between the objects of the
assesee's trust and that of the recipient trust to
which the assessee had advanced money?
2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case,
the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in holding that
there was no violation u/s.13(1)(b) of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 irrespective of the fact that the
recipient trust is established for the welfare of a
particular religious community?
3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case,
the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in holding that
there was no violation u/s.13(1)(b) of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that
there is a complete failure on the part of the
assessee to accumulate and invest the funds in terms
of the provisions of Section 11(5) of the I.T.Act?
For AY 2011-12
4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case,
the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in holding that the
assessee is eligible for exemption u/s.11 of the IT
Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that there is
a complete mismatch between the objects of the
2 of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
assessee trust and that of the recipient trust to which
the assessee had advanced money?
5. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case,
the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in holding that
donation specifically given for corpus funds cannot
be treated as income of the trust if the assessee is
not eligible for exemption u/s.11 of the IT Act?
2. It is brought to our notice by the learned Standing Counsel for the
appellant Revenue that in the instant case, as per the CBDT's Circular No.9 of
2024 dated 17.09.2024 the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit
imposed and therefore, the appeal can be disposed of, keeping the substantial
questions of law raised in this appeal open for adjudication at a later point of
time.
3. Recording the aforesaid submission made by the learned Standing
Counsel for the appellant Revenue, 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.)
23.10.2024
NCS : Yes/No
KST
3 of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.SURESH KUMAR, J.
AND
C.SARAVANAN, J.
KST
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
'C' Bench, Chennai.
23.10.2024
4 of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
