Partly allowed

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

Kerala HC3 Mar 2009ITA/73/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

ITAT allowed the appeal in part regarding Section 80 HHC computation, directing the Assessing Officer to recompute relief based on IPCA LABORATORY LTD. The Tribunal was confirmed on the legal expenses issue. Appeal otherwise dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Assessing Officer to recompute eligible relief under Section 80 HHC in terms of the IPCA LABORATORY LTD decision.

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Thiruvana Vs Lakshmanan & Co., Kollam — 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 TUESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2009 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1930 ITA.No. 73 of 2008() -------------------ITA.358/COCH/1999 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH ....................

¶3

APPELLANT/ APPELLANT

¶4

¶5

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶6

BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL,GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC FOR IT

¶7

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT -------------------------

¶8

M/S.LAKSHMAN & CO., KILIKOLLOOR, KOLLAM.

¶9

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ALONG WITH ITA NO.83/2008 ON 03/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶10

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

¶11

.................................................................... I.T. Appeal Nos.73 & 83 of 2008

¶12

.................................................................... Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2009.

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

Ramachandran Nair, J.

¶15

The main issue raised in these department appeals pertain to the computation of relief under Section 80 HHC of the Income Tax Act which is covered by decision of the Supreme Court in IPCA LABORATORY LTD. V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (266 ITR 521). So far as the next issue is concerned, we do not think there is any scope for interference with the order of the Tribunal because Tribunal found that legal expenses are incurred for the purpose of protecting business which would have been lost, if factory is not protected. We, therefore, confirm the order of the Tribunal on this issue. Appeal is, therefore, allowed in part i.e. pertaining to the computation of relief under Section 80 HHC with direction to the

¶16

¶17

Assessing Officer to recompute eligible relief in terms of decision of the Supreme Court. The Tribunal's order on this issue will stand reversed.

¶18

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge

¶19

K.SURENDRA MOHAN Judge

¶20

pms

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Periyar Beverages Private Limited

Hotel Shaziya Vs Commissioner of Income Tax, Cochin

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Thiruvan Vs M/S.Transmatic Systems Ltd., Thiruvanant

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

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

State of Kerala Vs Smt.P.v.Rajamma Swaminathan