THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TVM vs. M/S.SRINIKETHAN TRUST, KOLLAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA/106/2008HC KeralaKLHC01027011200819 February 2009Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the appeals filed by the Revenue. The Court held that the first three questions raised by the Revenue were covered by the Supreme Court's decisions in IPCA Laboratory Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and A.M. Moosa v. Commissioner of Income Tax. For the fourth question, the Court found it similar to an issue previously decided by the High Court in I.T.A.209/2002. Consequently, the High Court reversed the orders of the Tribunal and the first appellate authority concerning the computation of relief under Section 80HHC. The Assessing Officer was directed to modify the assessment in accordance with the aforementioned Supreme Court and High Court judgments, after providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard. The ratio decidendi is that when issues are covered by binding precedents from the Supreme Court or the High Court, those precedents must be followed.

What were the facts?

These appeals were filed by the Revenue against orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessee is M/s. Srinikethan Trust. The appeals challenge the ITAT's decisions concerning the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. The procedural history indicates that the appeals were heard by the High Court of Kerala. The High Court noted that the first three questions raised by the Revenue were covered by Supreme Court decisions in IPCA Laboratory Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and A.M. Moosa v. Commissioner of Income Tax. The fourth question was similar to an issue previously decided by the High Court in another case.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal erred in its computation of the exemption under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, as argued by the Revenue. The Assessee's contentions are not explicitly recorded in the judgment. The Revenue relies on Supreme Court decisions in IPCA Laboratory Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (266 ITR 521) and A.M. Moosa v. Commissioner of Income Tax (294 ITR 1). 2. Whether the Tribunal's decision on the fourth question, concerning the computation of relief under Section 80HHC, was in line with established legal principles, as argued by the Revenue. The Assessee's contentions are not explicitly recorded. The Revenue refers to a previous judgment of the High Court dated 25.2.2008 in I.T.A.209/2002.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80HHC

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 C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 30TH MAGHA 1930 ITA.No. 106 of 2008() ---------------------------------- ITA.356/COCH/1999 of INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT (S) /APPELLANT ------------------------ THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. MR.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) MR.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- M/S.SRINIKETHAN TRUST, PARAMESWAR NAGAR, KOLLAM. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/02/2009, ALONG WITH ITA NO.129 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I.T.A. Nos: 106 & 129 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th February, 2009.

JUDGMENT RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. These appeals are filed by the revenue against the orders of the Tribunal raising several questions relating to assessee's claim for exemption provided under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. Of the four questions raised first three are covered by two decisions of the Supreme Court one reported in IPCA Laboratory Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (266 ITR 521) and the other in A.M.Moosa v. Commissioner of Income Tax (294 ITR 1). So far as the fourth question is concerned the issue raised is similar to the second question considered and decided by this Court by judgment dated 25.2.2008 in I.T.A.209/2002. Following the above judgments we allow the appeal by reversing the order of the Tribunal and that of the first appellate authority pertaining to computation of relief under Section 80HHC with direction to the Assessing Officer to modify the assessment by following the above decisions of the Supreme Court and this Court after giving

I.T.A.Nos: 106 & 129/2008 2 opportunity to the assessee . C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj

K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated:

More judgments on Section 80HHC

All 1,083 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80HHC →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →