The Commissioner Of Income Taxchennai v. Shri N.k.v.krishna
High Court
17 Mar 2025 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Taxchennai v. Shri N.k.v.krishna
Date of order
17 Mar 2025
Assessment year(s)
2005-06
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Taxchennai v. Shri N.k.v.krishna, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: In this appeal, the appellant has raised the following substantial questions of law to be answered:- (1)Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in not sustaining the addition of Rs.2,54,98,454/- for the assessment year 2005-06?Appellate Tribuna...
Decision: (3)In view of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned Senior standing counsel for the appellant, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.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 : 17.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
TCA.No.673/2013
The Commissioner of Income TaxChennai
... Appellant
Vs.
Shri N.K.V.Krishna
... Respondent
Common Prayer: Tax Case Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'B' Bench, Chennai dated 04.11.2011 passed in ITA.No.1381/Mds/2011.
For Appellant
: Mr.Karthik Ranganathan Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent
: Mr.M.Velmurugan
JUDGMENT
TCA.No.673/2013
[Delivered by S.S.SUNDAR, J.,]
(1)This appeal is directed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal,'B'Bench,Chennai,dated04.11.2011in ITA.No.1381/Mds/2011. In this appeal, the appellant has raised the ITA.No.1381/Mds/2011. In this appeal, the appellant has raised the
following substantial questions of law to be answered:-
(1)Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in not sustaining the addition of Rs.2,54,98,454/- for the assessment year 2005-06?Appellate Tribunal was right in not sustaining the addition of Rs.2,54,98,454/- for the assessment year 2005-06?
(2)Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in cancelling the reassessment orders holding that the notice issued under Section 148 for various assessment years was not proper?Appellate Tribunal was right in cancelling the reassessment orders holding that the notice issued under Section 148 for various assessment years was not proper?
(2)Learned Senior Standing counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the amounts involved in the present appeals are below the monetary limit as per the Circular issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes in Circular No.5/2024 and 09/2024 dated 15.03.2024 and 17.09.2024 respectively.that the amounts involved in the present appeals are below the monetary limit as per the Circular issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes in Circular No.5/2024 and 09/2024 dated 15.03.2024 and 17.09.2024 respectively.
(3)In view of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned Senior standing
counsel for the appellant, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. However,
the substantial questions of law are left open. No costs.
TCA.No.673/2013
AP
[S.S.S.R., J.] [C.S.N., J.] 17.03.2025
Internet : Yes
ToThe Commissioner of Income TaxChennai.
TCA.No.673/2013
S.S. SUNDAR, J.,andC.SARAVANAN, J.,
AP
TCA.No.673/2013
17.03.2025
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.