Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Indus Valley Housing A
High Court
07 Feb 2019 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Indus Valley Housing A
Date of order
07 Feb 2019
Assessment year(s)
2010-11
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Indus Valley Housing A, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the appeal filedby the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed, keeping open thesubstantial question of law for determination in an appropriatecase.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 07.02.2019
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
Tax Case Appeal No. 135 of 2017
Commissioner of Income TaxNo.121, Mahatma Gandhi RoadNungambakkam,Chennai. ..Appellant /RespondentVs.M/s. Indus Valley HousingA-68, Anna Nagar East,Chennai – 600 102.PAN: AAC FI 2508 P ..Respondent/Appellant-----
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'D' Bench, Chennai, dated 22.04.2016 made inITA No.611/Mds/2014 against the order of the Commissioner ofIncome Tax(Appeals) VII dated 21.01.2014 made in ITA No. 948/13-14 for the Assessment Year 2010-11.
For Respondent : Mr.R.Sivaraman
(Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J.)
This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by the Revenue callingin question the correctness of the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, by raising the following substantialquestions of law:
"Whether default in payment of tax or interestcould be presumed to be for good and sufficientreason and penalty under Section 221(1) of the Actdeleted by the Tribunal, when the assessee was found
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
to have spent a huge amount in businessdiversification and/or expansion and thus short offunds to pay taxes and interest on taxes?".
2. When the matter is taken up for admission, the learnedStanding Counsel brought to our notice the Circular instructionissued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide CircularNo.3/2018 dated 11.7.2018 wherein it is stipulated that appealsshall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the HighCourt in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.50 lakhs.
3. In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the appeal filedby the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed, keeping open thesubstantial question of law for determination in an appropriatecase.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar
vsg
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
1.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-VII O/o. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-VII 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-34.
2.The Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai.Tax Case Appeal No. 135 of 2017rrs 26/03/2019
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.