The Commissioner of Income-tax Chennai v. N. Murugesan
[Citation -2020-LL-0128-16]

Citation 2020-LL-0128-16
Appellant Name The Commissioner of Income-tax Chennai
Respondent Name N. Murugesan
Court HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 28/01/2020
Assessment Year 1997-98
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags bogus sundry creditors • monetary limit • tax effect
Bot Summary: Dt.28.1.2020 in T.C.A.1181/2010 CIT v. N.Murugesan 2/4 following substantial question of law: Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the addition on account of the bogus sundry creditors cannot be sustained on the ground that the Assessing Officer had not allowed the cross examination of the alleged creditors 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Senior Standing Counsel brought to our notice the Circular instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No.17/2019 dated 8th August 2019, wherein, it is stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/-. In the instant case, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed and therefore, the Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial question of law for determination in appropriate cases.


Judgt. dt.28.1.2020 in T.C.A.1181/2010 CIT v. N.Murugesan 1/4 IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28.1.2020 CORAM HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR Tax Case (Appeal) No.1181 of 2010 Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai-34. Appellant Vs. N.Murugesan Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 against order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 25.11.2005 made in ITA No.687/Mds/2001. For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa For Respondent : Mr.M.P.Senthilkumar for Mr.Philip George JUDGMENT (Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J) This Tax Case Appeal has been filed by Revenue, calling in question correctness of order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai, dated 25.11.2005 made in ITA No.687/Mds/2001, for Assessment Year 1997-1998, by raising http://www.judis.nic.in Judgt. dt.28.1.2020 in T.C.A.1181/2010 CIT v. N.Murugesan 2/4 following substantial question of law: "Whether in facts and circumstances of case, Tribunal was right in holding that addition on account of bogus sundry creditors cannot be sustained on ground that Assessing Officer had not allowed cross examination of alleged creditors?" 2. When matter is taken up for hearing, learned Senior Standing Counsel brought to our notice Circular instruction issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No.17/2019 dated 8th August 2019, wherein, it is stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by Department before High Court in cases where tax effect does not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). 3. In instant case, tax effect is said to be less than monetary limit imposed and therefore, Appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed, as withdrawn, keeping open substantial question of law for determination in appropriate cases. No costs. (V.K.,J.) (R.S.K.,J.) 28.1.2020 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No ssk. http://www.judis.nic.in Judgt. dt.28.1.2020 in T.C.A.1181/2010 CIT v. N.Murugesan 3/4 To 1. Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai-34. 2. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai. 3. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, City Cir.VII(2), Chennai. http://www.judis.nic.in Judgt. dt.28.1.2020 in T.C.A.1181/2010 CIT v. N.Murugesan 4/4 DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J. and R.SURESH KUMAR, J. ssk. T.C.(A) No.1181 of 2010 28.1.2020 http://www.judis.nic.in Commissioner of Income-tax Chennai v. N. Murugesan
Report Error