THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. APOLLO TYRES LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITA/140/2013HC KeralaKLHC01026025201329 July 2021Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Tribunal was right in annulling the reopening proceedings and setting aside the order of the CIT (Appeals). This decision was reached by following the High Court's own judgment dated February 27, 2019, in ITA Nos. 41 and 60/2011. The reasoning is that the substantial question of law framed at the time of admission of the appeal, which related to the merits of the assessee's claim under Section 80-1A, was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The principle established is that if prior appeals on the same issue of reopening have been dismissed, subsequent appeals challenging the same annulment will also be dismissed. The appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Revenue) is the appellant, and M/s. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (Assessee) is the respondent. The Revenue filed the present appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal), Cochin Bench, dated December 21, 2012, in MP No. 91/Coch/2012, which arose from ITA No. 299/Coch/2009. The core issue pertains to the reopening of assessment for Assessment Year 2003-04. The Revenue had previously filed ITA Nos. 41/2011 and 69/2011 challenging the annulment of the reopening of assessment by the Tribunal in earlier orders. These earlier appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed on February 27, 2019.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal is right in law in annulling the reopening proceedings and setting aside the order of CIT (Appeals)? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record specific contentions made by the assessee in this particular appeal. However, the fact that the Tribunal annulled the reopening proceedings and set aside the CIT(Appeals) order, and the Revenue's subsequent appeals were dismissed, implies the assessee's position was that the reopening was not justified. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue contended that the Tribunal was not right in annulling the reopening proceedings and setting aside the order of the CIT (Appeals). The Revenue had filed appeals against the Tribunal's earlier decisions on this matter.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

80-1A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 7TH SRAVANA, 1943 ITA NO. 140 OF 2013 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 299/2009 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/S: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 COCHIN BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM RESPONDENT/S: M/S. APOLLO TYRES LIMITED 6TH FLOOR, CHERUPUSHPAM BUILDINGS. SHANMUGHAM ROAD, KOCHI - 682 031. BY ADVS. SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS SRI.ABRAHAM VARGHESE THARAKAN SRI.BINU MATHEW SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE SR. SRI.TOM THOMAS KAKKUZHIYIL THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 29.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

I.T.A. No.140/2013 -2- J U D G M E N T S.V. Bhatti, J. Heard learned Standing Counsel Mr. Christopher Abraham and learned Senior Counsel Mr. Joseph Markos for parties. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax/Revenue is the appellant. M/s.Apollo Tyres Ltd., Kochi/Assessee is the respondent. Revenue aggrieved by the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'Tribunal'), Cochin Bench in M P No.91/Coch/2012 dated 21.12.2012 in ITA No.299/Coch/2009 has filed the instant appeal. The appeal deals with the reopening of assessment for the Assessment Year 2003-04. Revenue filed ITA No.41/2011 and ITA No.69/2011 questioning the annulment of reopening of assessment by the Tribunal in the respective orders challenged in those appeals. On 27.02.2019 the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed. The following substantial

I.T.A. No.140/2013 -3- question of law is reframed, as the substantial questions framed at the time of admission of the appeal relate to the merits on the entitlement of claim of assessee under Section 80-1A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’): Whether the Tribunal is right in law in annulling the reopening proceedings and setting aside the order of CIT (Appeals)? The question of law is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue, by following the judgment dated 27.02.2019 in ITA Nos.41 and 60/2011. The appeal stands dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE jjj

I.T.A. No.140/2013 -4- APPENDIX OF ITA 140/2013 PETITIONER ANNEXURE ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 DATED 12/12/2008 PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR AY 2003-04. ANNEXURE B COPY OF CIT(A)'S ORDER NO.24/24/26 & 27/R-1/E/CIT- II/08-09 DATED 30/03/2009. ANNEXURE C COPY OF ITAT'S ORDER IN ITA NO.299/COCH/2009 DATED 27/07/2012. ANNEXURE D COPY OF THE ITAT'S ORDER MP NO.91/COCH/2012 DATED 21/12/2012 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.299/COCH/2009 DATED 27/07/2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →