This appeal arose from the Tribunal's order denying a Section 80M deduction claim based on hypothetical expenditure deductions by the Assessing Officer. The Court found no ground to interfere with the Tribunal's decision.
The appeal was dismissed; relief under Section 80M was upheld as granted by the Tribunal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
TUESDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 16TH MAGHA 1929
ITA.No. 208 of 2001()
--------------------AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15.6.2001 IN COCH. IN ITA.876/1993 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH
APPELLANT:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN.
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON(SR.),SC FOR IT SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT
RESPONDENTS: -------------
THE FEDERAL BANK LTD., ALWAYE.
BY ADV. SRI.P.BALACHANDRAN
SMT.PREETHA S.NAIR
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/02/2008, ALONG WITH ITA NO. 209 OF 2001 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ.
I.T.A. No. 208 & 209 OF 2001
Dated this the 5th day of February, 2008
JUDGMENT
C.N. Ramachandran Nair,J.
These two connected appeals filed by the Revenue arise from the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93. All the questions raised except the one pertaining to allowance under Section 80M of the I.T. Act stand decided by this Court in the assessee's own case reported in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. NEDUNGADI BANK LTD., 264 I.T.R. 545 and later decisions in I.T.A.No. 73 and 191 of 2001. We therefore answer all questions except the one pertaining to part disallowance under Section 80M in favour of the assessee and against the revenue and consequently revenue's appeals are dismissed on these issues.
under Section 80M which provides for 60% of the deduction of
2
dividend received from other companies. The assessing officer made recomputation making partial disallowance of the claim on the ground that assessee would have incurred some expenditure for earing dividend income. The Tribunal found that there is no basis for estimating expenditure and reducing the same from the dividend income in respect of which Section 80M relief is claimed by the assessee. Having regard to the small amount of dividend and disallowance involved, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. We accordingly dismiss both the appeals.
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge.
(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge.
kk
3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal correctly computed relief under Section 80M regarding partial disallowance of dividend income due to hypothetical expenditure.
Whether this Court should interfere with the Tribunal's order dismissing the Revenue's appeals on dividend deduction issues.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nedungadi Bank Ltd.Referred¶22
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. NEDUNGADI BANK LTD., 264 I.T.R. 545
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Cochin
The Federal Bank Ltd., Alwaye
Smt. Preetha S. Nair
C.N. Ramachandran Nair
T.R. Ramachandran Nair
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
