Commissioner Of Income Taxcoimbatore v. Shri. P.subramanianno.80-A, P.v.krishnan Streetk.k.pudurcoimbatore – 641 038
High Court
29 Jan 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Taxcoimbatore v. Shri. P.subramanianno.80-A, P.v.krishnan Streetk.k.pudurcoimbatore – 641 038
Date of order
29 Jan 2016
Assessment year(s)
2007-08
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Taxcoimbatore v. Shri. P.subramanianno.80-A, P.v.krishnan Streetk.k.pudurcoimbatore – 641 038, 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made by the learnedcounsels appearing for the Appellant/Revenue, the present taxcase appeal stands dismissed, as withdrawn.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: 29.1.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDRENANDTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.VIMALA
Tax Case Appeal No.160 of 2013
Commissioner of Income TaxCoimbatore .. Appellant/Respondent Versus
Shri. P.SubramanianNo.80-A, P.V.Krishnan StreetK.K.PudurCoimbatore – 641 038 ..Respondent/Appellant
Prayer: Appeal has been filed u/s 260A of Income Tax act, 1961against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras'A' Bench, dated 26.7.2012 in ITA No.1363/Mds/2010 against theorder passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals-I),Coimbatore order dated 29.07.2010 in Appeal No.219/09-10 asagainst the order passed by the Additional Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Range II, Coimbatore-18 date of order 23.12.09 inPAN.NO.AOMPS8963A for the assessment year 2007-08.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar Mr.J.Narayanaswamy Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar Mr.M.Swaminathan
For Respondent : No Appearance
J U D G M E N T
The learned counsels appearing for the Appellant/Revenuehad submitted that they may be permitted by this Court towithdraw the present tax case appeal, 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 matter 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 casehttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
appeal, if it is found that it had been withdrawn,inadvertently, even though it falls under the exceptionsmentioned in paragraph 8 of the circular.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 appeal stands dismissed, as withdrawn. It is made clearthat the questions of law, which may arise for the decision ofthis Court, in the present tax case appeal, 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 appeal, if it is foundthat it had been withdrawn, inadvertently, even though it fallsunder the exceptions mentioned in paragraph 8 of the Circular,within a period of twelve weeks from today. No costs.
sd/-Assistant Registrar(Cs-III)
/TRUE COPY/ Sub-Assistant Registrar
lanTo:
1.The Assistant Registrar,The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras 'A' Bench, Rajaji Bhavan,Besant Nagar, Chennai.
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax,Coimbatore.
3.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)I, Coimbatore.
4.The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax,Range-II , Coimbatore -18.
+1 CC to MR.S.Sridhar Advocate. SR.NO. 5964+1 CC to MR.J.Narayanaswamy Advocate. SR.NO.6359
CO-PURJD 15/02/2016
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
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.