Case LawHigh Court › Exporting Company v. C.n.ramachandran Na...

Exporting Company v. C.n.ramachandran Nair)Judge

High Court 11 Feb 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Exporting Company v. C.n.ramachandran Nair)Judge
Date of order
11 Feb 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Remanded

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Exporting Company v. C.n.ramachandran Nair)Judge, the High Court (2008) remanded the matter.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 22ND MAGHA 1929 ITA.No. 66 of 2002() -------------------- ITA.166/1999 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT. ------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON(SR.),SR.COUNSEL FOR IT SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT. ------------------------ SHRI C.BABY JOHN, M/S. KERALA SEA FOODS, NEENDAKARA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.KOCHUNNY NAIR SRI.DALE P.KURIEN THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/02/2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. -------------------------------------------- I.T.A. No. 66 OF 2002 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT C.N. Ramachandran Nair,J. Even though respondent is reportedly dead, at the request ofcounsel appearing for the respondent, we implead his wife Mrs.C.Baby John as addl. respondent. We have heard standing counselappearing for the appellant and counsel appearing for the addl.respondent. 2. This appeal is filed against the decision of the Tribunalupholding the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 80HHC ofthe Income tax Act. We find that the main issue is covered in favour ofthe assessee by decision of the Supreme Court in BABY MARINEEXPORT's case reported in 290 I.T.R. 323. However, the decision inJANATHA CASHEW EXPORTING COMPANY's case relied on bythe Tribunal is now remanded back to the assessing officer by theSupreme Court in the decision reported in JANATHA CASHEW EXPORTING COMPANY V. C.I.T., (2008) 214 C.T.R. 11. Wetherefore set aside the order of the Tribunal with direction to theassessing officer to redo the assessment after considering the reliefunder Section 80HHC in the light of the decision of the Supreme Courtin Baby Marine Exports's case and Janatha Cashew Exporting Co. case,referred above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)Judge. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. kk
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan