The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Salary Ward,Chennai 600 034 v. C.k.theerthagirino
High Court
26 Sep 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Salary Ward,Chennai 600 034 v. C.k.theerthagirino
Date of order
26 Sep 2016
Assessment year(s)
2005-2006
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Salary Ward,Chennai 600 034 v. C.k.theerthagirino, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Preserving the said liberty, the appeal stands dismissed as not pressed.
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: 26.09.2016
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE NOOTY.RAMAMOHANA RAOANDTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE P.DEVADASS
Tax Case (Appeal) No.686 of 2014
The Commissioner of Income Tax,Salary Ward,Chennai 600 034.
... Appellant
Vs.
C.K.TheerthagiriNo.70, Landon's Road,Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010....Respondent
Appeal filed under Sec. 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order, dated 06.01.2014 made in ITA No.1957/Mds/2013 for the Assessment year 2005-2006 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai ''D'' Bench.
For Appellant: Mr.M.SwaminathanFor respondent: Mr.Subbaraya Iyar ****
(ORDER OF THE COURT WAS MADE BY
NOOTY.RAMAMOHANA RAO, J.)
In this appeal, though substantial questions of law do arise for consideration, however, the value involved in this appeal is far-too insignificant particularly viewed in the backdrop of the circular instructions passed on through Circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 by the department. These instructions were also rendered applicable
NOOTY.RAMAMOHANA RAO,J.and Dr.P.DEVADASS,J.
vaan
to the pending appeals apart from applying to the appeals to be filed henceforth. It is now decided that an appeal shall not be filed in case where tax effect does not exceed Rs.20 lakhs. In the instant case, tax effect is less than the limit of Rs.20 lakhs prescribed in the said circular and hence, this appeal is not pressed rightly by the learned Standing counsel Mr.M.Swaminathan. However, the learned Standing counsel seeks leave to preserve the questions of law raised for adjudication in the appeal for consideration at a later point of time in appropriate cases.
Preserving the said liberty, the appeal stands dismissed as not pressed. No cost.
(N.R.R.J.) (Dr.P.D.S.,J.) 26.09.2016
Index : Yes/NoInternet : Yes/Novaan
Tax Case (Appeal) No.686 of 2014
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.