THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. M/S. HIGH RANGE FOODS (P) LTD.,
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court, while acknowledging that the assessees had a potentially good case on merits, ultimately decided to dismiss the appeals based on the prevailing litigation policy of the Central Government. The Court noted that the Revenue had sought withdrawal of almost all the appeals in the batch, citing the litigation policy. The Court observed that three other appeals on identical issues had already been withdrawn by the department. Even for the two appeals (ITA Nos. 233 of 2012 and 245 of 2012) for which specific instructions for withdrawal were not yet received, the Court decided to reject them in line with the litigation policy. The demands in these two appeals were approximately Rs. 17 lakhs and Rs. 25,44,000/- respectively. The Court explicitly stated that the question of law raised in these appeals was left open.
What were the facts?
This judgment concerns a batch of Income Tax Appeals filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax against various private limited companies (assessees). The core issue revolves around the tax treatment of amounts deposited by franchisees of the assessees, which represented the value of freezers supplied by the assessees for storing their products. The assessees argued that they offered the depreciated value of these freezers as income annually, and any balance written down value was refunded to franchisees upon discontinuation. The Revenue challenged this treatment. The appeals were filed against orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The amounts in dispute in these appeals were stated to be less than Rs. 50 lakhs.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the amounts deposited by franchisees, representing the value of freezers supplied by the assessees, constitute income in the year of deposit, or if the income is to be recognized over time based on depreciation, as argued by the assessees. Assessee's Contention: The assessees contended that they supplied brand-new freezers to franchisees on a deposit of the price. They argued that depreciation was made annually on the value of the freezers, and the depreciated amounts were offered as income in that particular year. Upon discontinuation of the franchise, the balance written down value was refunded to the franchisees. Therefore, the initial deposit did not represent income in the year of agreement, as it was not inuring to the assessees as income. They asserted they had a strong case on merits. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's position, as implied by their appeals, was that the initial deposit represented income to the assessees. The judgment does not explicitly detail the Revenue's arguments beyond their appeal against the ITAT's orders.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940 ITA.No. 49 of 2012 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 651/2010 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 12-08-2011 APPELLANT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) (CENTRAL), COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENTS: M/S. HIGH RANGE FOODS (P) LTD., CHERUPARAMBATH ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI-682 020. BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SMT.PREETHA S.NAIR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH (SR.) OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.03.2019, ALONG WITH ITA.2/2015, ITA.67/2015, ITA.77/2012, ITA.100/2013, ITA.161/2013,
ITA.202/2013,
ITA.229/2012,
ITA.233/2012, ITA.245/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940 ITA.No. 2 of 2015 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 118/COCH/2014 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 08-05-2014 APPELLANT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT: M/S. KREEM FOODS PVT. LTD. XXVIII/3030, CHERUPARAMBATHU ROAD, KADAVANTHRA KOCHI-682 020 BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH (SR.) SRI.RAJA KANNAN THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.03.2019, ALONG
WITH
ITA.233/2012,
ITA.67/2015,
ITA.202/2013,
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 3 ITA.245/2012,
ITA.100/2013,
ITA.229/2012,
ITA.77/2012, ITA.161/2013, ITA.49/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940 ITA.No. 67 of 2015 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 79/COCH/2014 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 25-04-2014 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: M/S.HIGH RANGE FOODS PVT. LTD CHERUPARAMBATH ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI-682 020. BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH (SR.)
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 4 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.03.2019, ALONG WITH ITA.233/2012, ITA.2/2015, ITA.202/2013, ITA.245/2012, ITA.100/2013,
ITA.229/2012,
ITA.77/2012,
ITA.161/2013, ITA.49/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940 ITA.No. 77 of 2012 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 652/COCH/2010 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 12.8.2011 APPELLANT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), (CENTRAL) KOCHI. BY ADVS. SRI. P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT: M/S.COMBINED FOODS(P)LTD. CHERUPARAMBATHU ROAD, KADAVANTHARA, KOCHI-682 020. BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SMT.PREETHA S.NAIR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 5 SRI.P.GOPINATH (SR.) THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.03.2019, ALONG WITH ITA.233/2012, ITA.2/2015, ITA.67/2015, ITA.202/2013, ITA.245/2012,
ITA.100/2013,
ITA.229/2012,
ITA.161/2013, ITA.49/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940 ITA.No. 100 of 2013 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 598/COCH/2010 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 09-08-2012 APPELLANT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL),COCHIN. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT: M/S.KREEM DRINKS (P) LTD XXVIII/3030,CHERUPARAMBATHU ROAD,KADAVANTHRA,KOCHI- 682020. BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 6 SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH (SR.) SRI.SANDEEP GOPALAKRISHNAN THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.03.2019, ALONG WITH ITA.233/2012, ITA.2/2015, ITA.67/2015, ITA.202/2013, ITA.245/2012,
ITA.229/2012,
ITA.77/2012,
ITA.161/2013, ITA.49/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940 ITA.No. 161 of 2013 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 168/COCH/2012 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 06-12-2012 APPELLANT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL),COCHIN. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT: M/S KREEM FOODS (P) LTD XXVIII/3030,CHERUPARAMBATHU ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI 682 020
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 7 BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SMT.PREETHA S.NAIR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH (SR.) THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.03.2019, ALONG WITH ITA.233/2012, ITA.2/2015, ITA.67/2015, ITA.202/2013, ITA.245/2012,
ITA.100/2013,
ITA.229/2012,
ITA.77/2012, ITA.49/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940 ITA.No. 202 of 2013 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA NO.167/COCH/2012 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 6.12.2012 APPELLANT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), COCHIN. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT: M/S. KREEM DRINKS (P) LIMITED
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 8 XXVIII/3030, CHERUPARAMBATHU ROAD, KADAVANTHRA KOCHI-682 020. BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SMT.PREETHA S.NAIR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH (SR.) THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.03.2019, ALONG WITH ITA.233/2012, ITA.2/2015, ITA.67/2015, ITA.245/2012, ITA.100/2013,
ITA.229/2012,
ITA.77/2012,
ITA.161/2013, ITA.49/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940 ITA.No. 229 of 2012 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 655/COCH/2010 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 25-05-2012 APPELLANT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL),COCHIN. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 9 RESPONDENT: M/S.JOJO FROZEN FOODS (P) LTD. CHERUPARAMBATH ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI-682 020. BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH (SR.) SRI.SANDEEP GOPALAKRISHNAN THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.03.2019, ALONG WITH ITA.233/2012, ITA.2/2015, ITA.67/2015, ITA.202/2013, ITA.245/2012,
ITA.100/2013,
ITA.77/2012,
ITA.161/2013, ITA.49/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940 ITA.No. 233 of 2012 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 599/COCH/2010 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 25-05-2012 APPELLANT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), COCHIN. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 10 SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT: M/S. SOUTH SHORE ICE CREAMS (P) LTD. XXVIII/3030, CHERUPARAMBATHU ROAD, KADAVANTHRA KOCHI 682020 BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SMT.PREETHA S.NAIR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH (SR.) THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.03.2019, ALONG WITH ITA.2/2015, ITA.67/2015, ITA.202/2013, ITA.245/2012, ITA.100/2013,
ITA.229/2012,
ITA.77/2012,
ITA.161/2013, ITA.49/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940 ITA.No. 245 of 2012 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 654/COCH/2010 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 25-05-2012 APPELLANT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(CENTRAL), COCHIN
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 11 BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENTS: M/S CREAM PACKS(P)LTD XXVIII/2485, CHERUPARAMBATHU ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI - 682 020. BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SMT.PREETHA S.NAIR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH (SR.) THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.03.2019, ALONG WITH ITA.233/2012, ITA.2/2015, ITA.67/2015, ITA.202/2013, ITA.100/2013,
ITA.229/2012,
ITA.77/2012,
ITA.161/2013, ITA.49/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
K.VINOD CHANDRAN & V.G.ARUN, JJ. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of March, 2019 JUDGMENT Vinod Chandran, J. In the above batch of cases, the issue raised is of the addition to income, of the amounts deposited by the franchisees of the assessees, who have been supplied with freezers for storing the respondent's-assessee's products. The deposit made is the value of the freezers. The learned counsel for the assessees, at the outset, submitted that in all the above cases the demand is less than Rs.50 lakhs and hence the continuance of the appeals as per the present litigation policy cannot be allowed. It is also submitted that three other appeals bearing Nos.ITA No.66 of 2014, 68 of 2014 and 21 of 2015, on the identical issue, have also been withdrawn by the department based on litigation policy.
We hence directed the learned Standing Counsel Sri. Jose Joseph to get instructions in the matter. Sri. Jose Joseph submits that he has received written instructions with respect to the withdrawal of all the above appeals except two which are ITA Nos.233 of 2012 and 245 of 2012.
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 13 3. The learned counsel for the respondent also submits that the system was in so far as supplying brand new freezers to the franchisees on a deposit of the price; taken from these franchisees. Every year there was a depreciation made on the value and the depreciated amounts offered as income in that particular year. If the franchisee discontinued the franchise then the balance written down value available as per the books of accounts are refunded to the franchisees. Hence, it is submitted that the income is returned in phases and there is no warrant for the addition made in the year in which the franchisee agreement is entered into, since it does not inure to the assesses as income. The learned counsel for the respondent asserts that even on merits he has a good case. However, in the circumstance of Revenue having sought for withdrawal of almost all the cases, we are of the opinion that even the two cases in which instructions have not been received are to be rejected following the litigation policy as introduced by the Central Government. We find that in ITA No.233 of 2012, the demand is around Rs.17 lakhs and in ITA.No.245 of 2012 the demand is around Rs.25,44,000/-.
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 14 There are other appeals in the batch in which the demand is far greater but all less than Rs.50,00,000/-. In such circumstances, we reject the appeals based on the litigation policy, leaving open the question of law raised. Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE Sd/- V.G.ARUN, JUDGE cms
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 15 APPENDIX OF ITA 49/2012 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A SPECIMENT COPY OF AGREEMENT ANNEXED AS ANNEXURE 1 TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF ORDER U/S.143(3) OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 31.12.2009. ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 20.9.2010. ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 12.8.2011. ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE COMPANY. APPENDIX OF ITA 2/2015 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) INCOME TAX ACT 1961 DATED 31.12.2012. ANNEXURE B CIT (A) S ORDER IN E-166/CIT(A)/-1/12-13 DATED 18.12.2013. ANNEXURE C ITAT'S ORDER IN ITA NO.118/COCH/2014 DATED 8.5.2014. APPENDIX OF ITA 67/2015 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT DATED 3.1.2013 PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 16 OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS-II) NO.E-171/CIT(A)- 1/2012-13 DATED 19.11.2013 ASST. YEAR 2010- 11. ANNEXURE C COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH IN ITA.73- 79/COCH/2014 DATED 26.12.2009. APPENDIX OF ITA 77/2012 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A SPECIMEN COPY OF AGREEMENT ANNEXED AS ANNEXURE 1 TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 31.12.2009. ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 27.9.2010. ANNEXURE D TRUE COY OF ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 12.8.2011. ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE COMPANY. APPENDIX OF ITA 100/2013 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE RELEVANT CLAUSES THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THE VENDORS ANNEXED AS ANNEXURE 1 TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ANNEXURE B COPY OF MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE COMPANY. ANNEXURE C COPY OF ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 31.12.2009.
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 17 INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 20.8.2010. ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 9.8.2012. APPENDIX OF ITA 161/2013 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF RELEVANT CLAUSED THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THE VENDORS ANNEXED AS ANNEXURE 1 TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ANNEXURE B COPY OF MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE COMPANY. ANNEXURE C COPY OF ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 13.12.2010. ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 26.3.2012. ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 6.12.2012. APPENDIX OF ITA 202/2013 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE RELEVANT CLAUSED THE AGREEMENT BETWEENT HE ASSESSEE AND VENDORS ANNEXED AS ANNEXURE 1 TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ANNEXURE B COPY OF MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE COMPANY.
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 18 ANNEXURE C COPY OF ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 27.12.2010. ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 26.3.2012. ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 6.12.2012. APPENDIX OF ITA 229/2012 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE RELEVANT CLAUSES OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THE VENDORS ANNEXED AS ANNEXURE 1 TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ANNEXURE B COPY OF MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE COMPANY. ANNEXURE C COPY OF ORDER U/S. 143(3) OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 31.12.2009. ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 20.9.2010. ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 25.5.2012. APPENDIX OF ITA 233/2012 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
I.T.A.Nos.49 of 2012, 100 of 2013, 161 of 2013, 202 of 2013, 2 of 2015, 229 of 2012, 233 of 2012, 245 of 2012, 67 of 2015 & 77 of 2012 19 VENDORS ANNEXED AS ANNEXURE 1 TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ANNEXURE B COPY OF MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE COMPANY. ANNEXURE C COPY OF ORDER U/S 143930 OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 31.12.2009. ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 20.8.2010. ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 25.5.2012. APPENDIX OF ITA 245/2012 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE RELEVANT CLAUSES OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEENT EH ASSESSEE AND THE VENDORS ANNEXED AS ANNEXURE 1 TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ANNEXURE B COPY OF MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE COMPANY. ANNEXURE C COPY OF ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE ASSESSING OFFCIER DATED 31.12.2009. ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 20.9.2010. ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 25.5.2012. RESPONDENTS EXTS NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE cms
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Noore Manpower Services vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 2 Nov 2026
- Maa Bhawani Minrals vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S. Nourangi Paints vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- Basant Kumar Gupta vs. Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S Swapnashiyana Homes Developers Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
