Madras H.C : There is nothing pointed out to us that the appeals can be covered under the four exceptions given in that circular and that is not the case of the Department

High Court Of Madras

Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. S. Annamalai

Sections WT 27A

V.S. Sirpurkar & N.V. Balasubramanian, JJ.

Tax Case Nos. 335 & 336 of 2000 and 170 of 2001

15th July, 2002

Counsel Appeared

T.C.A. Ramanujam, for the Revenue : P.P.S. Janardhana Raja, for the Assessee

JUDGMENT

V.S. SIRPURKAR, J. :

Rule returnable forthwith in TC No. 170 of 2001. Mr. Janardhana Raja accepts notice for the assessee in TC No. 170 of 2001.

2. At the outset, the respondent’s counsel points out to us, a circular by the Department bearing F. No. 279/126/1998-ITJ, dt. 27th March, 2000, whereby the limits are fixed for filing the appeals or the references, as the case may be, by the Department. Mr. P.P.S. Janardhana Raja points out and it is not controverted that in the present appeals, the tax liability is shorter than those limits fixed by the circular. There is nothing pointed out to us that the appeals can be covered under the four exceptions given in that circular and that is not the case of the Department also. In that view, we are of the clear opinion that the Department could not have filed these appeals. Such a view has been taken by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Camco Colour Co. (2002) 173 CTR (Bom) 255 : (2002) 254 ITR 565 (Bom). We respectfully agree with that view. Even on the merits, we do not find any substance in the matter. In that view the appeals are dismissed. No costs.

[Citation : 258 ITR 675]