Case LawHigh Court › Judgt. Dt. 6.9.19 In T.c.1344/2009Cit v....

Judgt. Dt. 6.9.19 In T.c.1344/2009Cit v. P.ananthanayagi1/4

High Court 06 Sep 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Judgt. Dt. 6.9.19 In T.c.1344/2009Cit v. P.ananthanayagi1/4
Date of order
06 Sep 2019
Assessment year(s)
2005-2006
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Judgt. Dt. 6.9.19 In T.c.1344/2009Cit v. P.ananthanayagi1/4, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal.

Decision: In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial question of law for determination in appropriate cases.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 6.9.2019 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN Tax Case No.1344 of 2009 Commissioner of Income TaxChennai IV.Appellant Vs.Smt.P.AnanthanayagiRespondent Tax Case filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 29.5.2009 made in ITA No.2053/Mds/2008. For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent: Ms.Sree Lakshmi Valli. J U D G M E N T(Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J) This Tax Case has been filed by the Revenue, calling in question the correctness of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 29.5.2009 made in ITA No.2053/Mds/2008, for the Assessment Year 2005-2006, by raising the following substantial question of law: 2/4 "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was entitled to exemption under Section 54F claimed at Rs.16,96,579/- even though the assessee owned two residential properties at the time of claiming exemption under Section 54F?" 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Senior Standing Counsel brought to our notice the Circular instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No.17/2019 dated 8th August 2019, wherein, it is stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). 3. In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial question of law for determination in appropriate cases. No costs. (V.K.,J.) (C.S.N.,J.) 6.9.2019 Index: Yes/NoInternet: Yes/Nossk. 3/4 To 1. Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai IV. Chennai IV. 2. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai. 3. The Income Tax Officer, Business Ward I (1), Chennai 600 034. 4/4 DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J.and C.SARAVANAN, J. ssk. Tax Case No.1344 of 2009 6.9.2019.
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