THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN vs. M/S.APPOLLO TYRES LTD., COCHIN
What were the facts?
This appeal was filed by the Revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax, Cochin) against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kochi Bench in ITA No.901/Coch/2007. The assessee is M/s. Appollo Tyres Limited. The dispute concerns the charging of interest under Section 234D of the Income Tax Act for a period prior to its introduction. The Tribunal had previously ruled on this matter, leading to the present appeal by the Revenue.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the issue regarding the charging of interest under Section 234D of the Income Tax Act only from 01.06.2003, the date of its introduction, had already been considered and decided by the same Court. In a previous judgment in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Kerala Chemicals and Proteins Ltd. ([2010] 323 ITR 584 (Ker)), the Court had held that interest under Section 234D can be levied only with effect from 1st June, 2003. Therefore, in light of this precedent, the questions of law were answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The appeal was dismissed.
What were the issues?
1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in the absence of any specification in the provision of section 234D, interest can be charged for a period prior to the introduction of the provision with effect from 1-6-2003? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case (and in the absence of a finding that the issue is a debatable issue), the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the interest under Section 234D cannot be charged from 26-5-2000 to 1-6-2003? Assessee's Contention: The assessee's implicit contention, as understood from the Revenue's appeal and the Court's decision, is that interest under Section 234D cannot be levied for periods before its effective date of introduction. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's appeal indicates their contention that interest under Section 234D could be charged for the period in question, despite the provision's introduction date.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU THUR AY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/10TH BHADRA, 1938 ITA.No. 1468 of 2009 ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 901/Coch/2007 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 28-11-2008 -------- APPELLANT/APPELLANT: --------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN.
BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: -------------------------------- M/S.APPOLLO TYRES LIMITED, 6TH FLOOR,CHERUPUSHPAM BUILDINGS, SHANMUGHAM ROAD,COCHIN-31. BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA (SR.) BY ADV. SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN BY ADV. SRI.BINU MATHEW BY ADV. SRI.TERRY V.JAMES BY ADV. SRI.B.J.JOHN PRAKASH BY ADV. SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL) THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ANTONY DOMINIC & DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ I. T. A. No.1468 of 2009 --------------------------------------------
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 234D
- Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Junagadh vs ITO Ward 1, JunagadhITA 837/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Shri Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, JunagadhITA 836/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Late Hetalkumar Gunvantlal Soni (Through… vs ITO Ward 1(2)(3), AhmedabadITA 462/AHD/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Vanita Anil Mehta, Mumbai vs ITO 33(1)(1), MumbaiITA 7836/MUM/2026[2018-2019]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2018-2019
- Krunal Bharat Bha vs Ar, Ahmedabadvs.the Income Tax Officer…ITA 332/AHD/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Bidasaria Fenster Solutions vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 13 Oct 2026
- Amit Agency vs. Commissioner, CGST And CxPatna · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S National Book Distributors vs. Assistant Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S D H Enterprise vs. The State Of Assam And 2 Ors.Gauhati · 12 Oct 2026
- Commissioner Of Service Tax-Ii Presently Known As Commissioner Of CGST And Cx Kolkata South vs. M/S Alfa Aluminium Private LimitedCalcutta · 12 Oct 2026