Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Taxchennai v....

The Commissioner Of Income Taxchennai v. Rajkumar Khemka

High Court 20 Feb 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Taxchennai v. Rajkumar Khemka
Date of order
20 Feb 2017
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Taxchennai v. Rajkumar Khemka, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Hence, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

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 MADRAS DATED: 20.02.2017 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.HULUVADI G.RAMESH, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICEAND THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICEANITA SUMANTH Tax Case Appeal No.1478 of 2008 The Commissioner of Income TaxChennai...Appellant Vs. Rajkumar Khemka..Respondent ----- Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 20.3.2008 in ITA No.1928/MDS/2007. ----- For Appellant: Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar Standing Counsel For Respondent: Not ready in notice----- J U D G M E N T (Delivered by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice) The Tax Case Appeal filed by the Revenue calling in question the correctness of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 20.3.2008 in ITA No.1928/MDS/2007, has been admitted on 03.11.2008 for consideration of the following substantial questions of law: "(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in remitting the issue relating to the addition of unexplained investments under Section 69 in the hands of the assessee to the assessing officer with the direction to delete the addition, if the amount is assessed in the hands of the recipient, Smt.Ritu Devi, as unexplained credit? and (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that entertaining and considering the additional ground for the first time on the issue of Long Term Capital Loss and remitting the issue to the CIT(A)? " 2. Circular instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 stipulates that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.20 lakhs. In the instant case, the tax effect is less than the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant seeks to withdraw this appeal. Hence, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Index : Yes/NoInternet : Yes/No (H.G.R., ACJ) (A.S.M.,J.) 20.02.2017 kpl THE HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICEand ANITA SUMANTH,J. kpl T.C.No.1478 of 2008. 20.02.2017. http://www.judis.nic.in
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 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