M/S TANVEST PROPERTIES vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/34/2014HC KeralaKLHC01026600201412 August 2014Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the appellant's counsel correctly pointed out that nothing survived in the appeal. This was due to the fact that the jurisdictional ITO had passed a consequential order in favour of the appellant following a previous order of remand by the ITAT. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal as infructuous, without answering the questions raised. The specific questions of law or fact that the ITAT had decided are not detailed in this High Court judgment, nor are the specific arguments made before the ITAT. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by M/s. Tanvest Properties against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cochin Bench, for the assessment year 2008-09. The ITAT's order was dated August 23, 2013. The appellant contended that the appeal had become infructuous. This was because the Income Tax Officer (ITO) had passed a consequential order following a previous remand by the ITAT, and this consequential order was in favour of the appellant. The appeal was before the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal is infructuous in light of the subsequent order passed by the jurisdictional Income Tax Officer (ITO) in favour of the assessee, following a remand by the ITAT. The assessee argued that the appeal had become infructuous because the ITO's consequential order, passed after the ITAT's remand, was favorable to the assessee. The revenue's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014/21ST SRAVANA, 1936 ITA.No. 34 of 2014 () ---------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 214/COCH/2013 (2008-09) OF THE I.T.A.TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH DATED 23-08-2013 APPELLANT(S)/APPELLANT IN ITA: ---------------------------------------------- M/S. TANVEST PROPERTIES FLAT NO. 12 A, EXPRESS ESTATE, KALOOR KOCHI-682 017. BY ADVS.SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SMT.A.PARVATHI MENON RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT IN ITA: ---------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C R BUILDINGS, I S PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM KOCHI-682 018. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX DEPT. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-08-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JJ. .................................................................... ITA No.34 of 2014 .................................................................... Dated this the 12th of August, 2014. J U D G M E N T Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. The learned counsel for the appellant, rightly, points out that nothing survives in this appeal, in view of the fact that following the order of remand, the jurisdictional ITO had passed consequential order, that too, in favour of the appellant. Under such circumstances, this appeal is dismissed as infructuous, without answering the questions raised. (THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) (P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE) jg

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →