Case LawHigh Court › Commissioner Of Income Tax Chennai v. M/...

Commissioner Of Income Tax Chennai v. M/S.cholamandalam Investments & Finance Company Limited, Dare House

High Court 21 Jan 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax Chennai v. M/S.cholamandalam Investments & Finance Company Limited, Dare House
Date of order
21 Jan 2016
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income Tax Chennai v. M/S.cholamandalam Investments & Finance Company Limited, Dare House, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: In view of the said submissions made by the learnedcounsels appearing for the Appellant/Revenue, the present taxcase appeals stand dismissed, as withdrawn.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21.1.2016 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDRENANDTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.VIMALA Tax Case Appeal Nos.342 to 344 of 2011 Commissioner of Income TaxChennai ..Appellant in all appealsVersus M/s.Cholamandalam Investments& Finance Company Limited,Dare House, No.2, NSC Bose Road,Chennai. .. Respondent in all appeals Prayer: Appeal in T.C.(A) No.342 of 2011 is presented tothe High Court under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras`B' Bench, dated 7.1.2011 in I.T.A.No.1538/Mds/2010. (TCA 342/2011):- against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-III, Chennai dated 30/06/2010 and made inITA.NO.135/04/05/TR8/A.III, against the Assessment order of theAssistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Range I(4),Chennai, dated 31/03/04 in PAN/GIR NO. for theAssessment year 2001-02. Appeal in T.C.(A) No.343 of 2011 is presented to the HighCourt under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras `B' Bench,dated 7.1.2011 in I.T.A.No.1539/Mds/2010. against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-III, Chennai dated 30/06/2010 and made inITA.NO.70/05-06/TR4/A.III, against the Assessment order of theAssistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Range I(4),Chennai, dated 23/03/05 in PAN/GIR NO. for theAssessment year 2002-03.https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Appeal in T.C.(A) No.344 of 2011 is presented to the HighCourt under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 againstthe order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras `B' Bench,dated 7.1.2011 in I.T.A.No.1540/Mds/2010. against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-III, Chennai dated 30/06/2010 and made inITA.NO.162/06-07/A.III, against the Assessment order of theAssistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-I(3),Chennai, in GI NO/PAN NO. for the Assessment year2003-04. The learned counsels appearing for the Appellant/Revenuehad submitted that they may be permitted by this Court towithdraw the present tax case appeals, in view of the CircularNo.21 of 2015, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes,Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India,dated 10.12.2015, as the tax effect relating to the matters isless than Rs.20,00,000/-. 2. The learned counsels had further submitted that libertymay be granted to the Appellant/Revenue to revive the tax caseappeals, if it is found that they had been withdrawn,inadvertently, even though they fall under the exceptionsmentioned in paragraph 8 of the circular. 3. In view of the said submissions made by the learnedcounsels appearing for the Appellant/Revenue, the present taxcase appeals stand dismissed, as withdrawn. It is made clearthat the questions of law, which may arise for the decision ofthis Court, in the present tax case appeals, are left open to beconsidered and decided in appropriate cases, in accordance withlaw. It is also made clear that it would be open to theAppellant/Revenue to revive the tax case appeals, if it is foundthat they had been withdrawn, inadvertently, even though theyhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ fall under the exceptions mentioned in paragraph 8 of theCircular, within a period of twelve weeks from today. No costs. sd/-Assistant Registrar(Cs-II) /TRUE COPY/ Sub-Assistant Registrar uskTo: fall under the exceptions mentioned in paragraph 8 of theCircular, within a period of twelve weeks from today. No costs. sd/-Assistant Registrar(Cs-II) /TRUE COPY/ Sub-Assistant Registrar uskTo: To:1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras `B' Bench.2.The Commissioner of Income Tax,(Appeals)-III, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Chennai - 34.3.The Assistant Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Central Range I(4), Chennai.4.The Assistant Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Company Circle-I(3), Chennai.+1 CC to Mr.T.Ravikumar, Senior Standing Counsel for ITDepartment. SR.NO. 4126+1 CC to MR.Subbaraya Aiyar Advocate. SR.NO. 3918Tax Case Appeal Nos.342 to 344of 2011CO-GJJD 03/02/2016
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan