Dismissed

Comm. of Income Tax, Trivandrum v. S. Sandeep Kumar,Pachayil Ind., Kadakkal

Kerala HC4 Mar 2009ITA/36/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the Income Tax Appeal filed by the Revenue against the Tribunal's order. The Court held that no substantial question of law existed as the tax effect was de minimis, and explicitly cautioned that dismissal should not endorse the Dept's view that failing to issue a Section 143(2) notice invalidated subsequent reopening under Section 147.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; dismissal not to be treated as endorsement of views below regarding Section 143(2) and Section 147.

Comm. of Income Tax, Trivandrum Vs S. Sandeep Kumar,Pachayil Ind… — Income Tax | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2009 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1930

¶4

ITA.No. 36 of 2008() -------------------ITA.474/COCH/2006 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH ....................

¶5

APPELLANT/APPELLANT: ------------------------------

¶6

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRIVANDRUM.

¶7

BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC FOR IT

¶8

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT:

¶9

¶10

SHRI.S.SANDEEP KUMAR, PACHAYIL INDUSTRIES, KADAKKAL.

¶11

ADV. SRI.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR FOR R

¶12

SRI.GEEN T.MATHEW FOR R

¶13

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.

¶15

.................................................................... I.T. Appeal No.36 of 2008

¶16

.................................................................... Dated this the 4th day of March, 2009.

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Ramachandran Nair, J.

¶19

Heard Standing Counsel for the appellant and counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee. Appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Tribunal rejecting their appeal for the reason that tax effect is below the limit that entitles the department to file an appeal before the Tribunal. Even though Standing Counsel submitted that substantial question of law is involved in this case and so much so, it falls under exemption clause, on going through the assessment order itself we find that if at all appeal was entertained by the Tribunal, it has to be again remanded for fresh adjudication in a case where the tax effect is around Rs.65,000/- only. We, therefore, do not find any substantial question of law involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue. Consequently we dismiss the appeal. However, dismissal of appeal should not be treated as our endorsement to the view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals) that failure to issue notice under Section 143

¶20

¶21

(2) is fatal to the income escaping assessment under Section 147 of the

¶22

Income Tax Act.

¶23

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge

¶24

K.SURENDRA MOHAN Judge

¶25

pms

Comm. of Income Tax, Trivandrum v. S. Sandeep Kumar,Pachayil Ind., Kadakkal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Comm. of Income Tax, Trivandrum v. S. Sandeep Kumar,Pachayil Ind., Kadakkal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Tvm. Vs M/S.Kallumoottil Jewellers, Pallimukku

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Thiruvana Vs Lakshmanan & Co., Kollam

Commissioner of Income Tax, Trichur Vs M/S. Kallur Chit Funds and Finance (P)

Commissioner of Income Tax,Trichur Vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.

Indal Photo Ltd. Vs Commissioner, Commercial Taxes

M/S.Ebenezar Press Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala