Case LawHigh Court › Tc/1107/2008 Of Commissioner Of Income T...

Tc/1107/2008 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.ramco Cements Ltd 98-A, Dr.radhakrishnan Road Mylapore, Chennai 600 004

High Court 04 Feb 2020 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Tc/1107/2008 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.ramco Cements Ltd 98-A, Dr.radhakrishnan Road Mylapore, Chennai 600 004
Date of order
04 Feb 2020
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Tc/1107/2008 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.ramco Cements Ltd 98-A, Dr.radhakrishnan Road Mylapore, Chennai 600 004, the High Court (2020) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

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 not pressed, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in an appropriate case.

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: 04.02.2020 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR Tax Case Appeal No.1107 of 2008The Commissioner of Income TaxMadurai...Appellant Vs.M/s.Ramco Cements Ltd98-A, Dr.Radhakrishnan RoadMylapore, Chennai 600 004....Respondent Prayer: Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 01.03.2006 made in ITA No.680/Mds/2005.-----For Appellant : Ms.S.Premalatha, Jr.Standing Counsel Assisted by Mr.M.Swaminathan, Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent : Mr.P.J.RishikeshJ U D G M E N T(Judgment Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,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, 'C' Bench, Madras, by raising the following substantial question of law: http://www.judis.nic.in "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Commissioner of Income Tax could not have revised the assessment order as the assessee had availed of the KVSS although the issue in question was not covered by the KVSS declaration?” 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned 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 not pressed, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in an appropriate case. (V.K.,J.) (R.S.K.,J.) 04-02-2020 KST To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai. DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J.and R. SURESH KUMAR, J. KST TC(A) No.1107 of 2008 04.02.2020
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