Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.ambadi Enterprises

High Court 22 Jan 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.ambadi Enterprises
Date of order
22 Jan 2016
Assessment year(s)
2004-2005
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/S.ambadi Enterprises, 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made by the learnedcounsels appearing for the Appellant/Revenue, the present taxcase appeal stands dismissed, as withdrawn.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: 22.1.2016 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDRENANDTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.VIMALA The Commissioner of Income Tax,Chennai. .. AppellantVersus M/s.Ambadi Enterprises,No.43, "Parry House", 5th Floor,Moore Street,Chennai 600 001. .. Respondent Prayer: Appeal presented to the High Court against the order ofthe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras `D' Bench, Chennaidated 18.06.2010, in I.T.A.No.300/Mds/2009(Assessment year 2004-2005) against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-VII, Chennai, dated 31.12.2008 and made in ITANo.54/07-08 against the assessment order of Asst.Commissioner ofIncome Tax Company Circle 1(1), Chennai dated 26.12.2006 for theyear 04-05. For Appellant : Mr.T.Ravikumar Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar Mr.J.Narayanaswamy Mr.M.SwaminathanFor Respondent : Mr.R.Sivaraman The learned counsels appearing for the Appellant/Revenue hadsubmitted that they may be permitted by this Court to withdrawthe present tax case appeal, in view of the Circular No.21 of2015, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department ofRevenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, dated10.12.2015, as the tax effect relating to the matter is lessthan Rs.20,00,000/-. 2. The learned counsels had further submitted that libertymay be granted to the Appellant/Revenue to revive the tax caseappeal, if it is found that it had been withdrawn,inadvertently, even though it falls under the exceptionsmentioned in paragraph 8 of the circular. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 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(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrarlan/claTo:1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras `D' Bench.2. The Asst. Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IV Floor, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai.3. The Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Chennai.4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-VIII, Chennai. 5. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle 1(1), Chennai.+ 1 cc to Mr.T. Ravikumar, Advocate SR.4690+ 1 cc to M/s. Subharaya, Advocate SR.39314+ 1 cc to Mr.R.Sivaraman, Advocate SR 4714[4/5/16]Tax Case Appeal No.1174 of 2010 KSJ(CO)EU 02.02.16
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