US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES PVT. LTD., vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers

ITA/81/2018HC KeralaKLHC01083294201821 December 2018Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON3 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the questions of law raised in the present appeal are identical to those that were decided by the Court in a common judgment dated August 9, 2018, in ITA No. 38/2014 and connected matters. Consequently, the Court followed its previous decision, wherein all issues were held in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. The appeal was allowed, and the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was set aside to the extent that the questions were answered in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. No costs were awarded. The specific findings on each issue from the prior judgment are not detailed here, but the principle applied is that of precedent based on identical questions of law.

What were the facts?

The assessee, US Technology Resources Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal before the High Court of Kerala against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cochin Bench, dated May 23, 2018. The appeal concerns assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The respondent is the Commissioner of Income Tax. The procedural history indicates that this appeal raises questions of law identical to those addressed in a batch of appeals previously decided by the High Court on August 9, 2018, in ITA No. 38/2014 and connected matters. The amount in dispute is not stated.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the questions of law raised in this appeal are identical to those decided in ITA No. 38/2014 and connected matters by this Court on 09.08.2018, and if so, whether the same principle of law should apply. Assessee's Contention: The assessee, through its counsel, argued that the issues in the present appeal are identical to those in a previously decided batch of appeals. Therefore, the outcome should be consistent with the High Court's decision in those matters. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the Revenue in this particular appeal. However, it implies that the Revenue was contesting the assessee's position, as the appeal is against an ITAT order that was presumably not entirely in the Revenue's favor.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY ,THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940 ITA.No. 81 of 2018 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 475/COCH/2016 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 23.5.2018 APPELLANT/S:/APPELLANT: US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES PVT. LTD., 721, NILA, TECHNOPARK CAMPUS, KARIAVATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 581, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR.SAJHISH KOCHATTIL. BY ADVS. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM SRI.P.GOPINATH RESPONDENT/S:/RESPONDENT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM SC THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ITA 81/18 2 K.VINOD CHANDRAN & ASHOK MENON, JJ. ------------------------------------------- ITA No.81 of 2018 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of December, 2018

J U D G M E N T Vinod Chandran, J. The questions of law raised in this IT Appeal are similar to that raised in a batch of IT Appeals, which were disposed of by this Court by common judgment dated 09.08.2018 in ITA No.38/2014 and connected matters. All the issues have been held in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. We, hence, follow the aforesaid decision in the case of identical appellant and allow the instant Appeal setting aside the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to the extent raised and the questions answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No costs. K.VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE ASHOK MENON JUDGE

ITA 81/18 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A THEOF THE ORDER DATED 26/02/2016 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(I), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 92 CA OF THE ACT, FOR THE A.Y 2012-13. ANNEXURE B THEOF THE DIRECTIONS DATED 05/08/2016 ISSUED BY THE DRP UNDER SECTION 144C(5) OF THE ACT. ANNEXURE C THEOF THE ORDER DATED 19/08/2016 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 92CA READ WITH SECTION 144C OF THE ACT, FOR THE A.Y.2012-13. ANNEXURE D THEOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM (WITHOUT ANNEXURES) DATED 10/10/2016 FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH FOR THE A.Y.2012-13. ANNEXURE E THEOF THE ORDER DATED 23/05/2018 ISSUED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH IN ITA NO.475/COCH/2016. ANNEXURE F THEOF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09/08/2018 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN I.T.A.NO.38/2014 AND CONNECTED APPEALS. [] jg

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →