The Commissioner Of Income Tax Trichy. Appellant In All v. M/S.swetha Industries
High Court
18 Mar 2019 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax Trichy. Appellant In All v. M/S.swetha Industries
Date of order
18 Mar 2019
Assessment year(s)
1999-2000
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax Trichy. Appellant In All v. M/S.swetha Industries, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In the instant cases, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the Appeals 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: 18.3.2019
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
Tax Case Appeal Nos.749 to 751 of 2010
The Commissioner of Income TaxTrichy.Appellant in allVs.
M/s.Swetha Industries,105/1, Thanjavur Main Road, Asoor, Trichy 620 011. Respondent in all
Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 15.5.2006 made in ITANos.457/Mds/2005, 458/Mds/2005 and 459/Mds/2005 against theorder of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) No.4, WilliamsRoad, Contonment, Tiruchirapalli-620 001 for the ITA.No.179, 180& 182 dt.30.11.04 for the assessment year 1999-2000, 2000-01, &2002-03 respectively against the assessment order of Income TaxDepartment, Ward IV(1) Tiruchirapalli for the PA.No.GIR.NO.AATFS0558C dt.31.03.2004 for the assessment years 1999-2000,2000-01, 2002-03 respectively.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan Senior Standing Counsel For respondent : Mr.A.S.Srinivasan for Mr.S.Sridhar
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J)These Tax Case Appeals have been filed by the Revenuecalling in question the correctness of the order passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated15.5.2006 made in ITA Nos.457/Mds/2005, 458/Mds/2005 and459/Mds/2005, by raising the following substantial question oflaw:
"Whether, on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law inholding that once the assessment was made under
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
Section 143(3) of the Act, any failure under Section143(1)(a) stands condoned and therefore provisionsof section 184(5) would not be invoked under theIncome Tax Act, 1961?"
2. When the matters are 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 cases, the tax effect is said to be lessthan the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the Appeals filedby the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed, keeping open thesubstantial question of law for determination in an appropriatecase.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrarssk.To1. The Commissioner of Income Tax Trichy.
2. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai3. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-IV(1), Trichy.
4.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)No.4, Williams Road, Contonment, Tiruchirapalli-620 001.
5.The Assistant Registrar,Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,III rd Floor,Rajaji Bhavan,Besand Nagar, Chennai-90
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
+1cc to Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate sr.26225
+1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate sr.25980
TCA Nos.749 to 751 of 2010
nr 12/07/2019
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.