Income Tax v. C.n.ramachandran Nair, Judge

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 THURSDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2008 / 4TH MAGHA 1929 ITA.No. 55 of 2001() -------------------- ITA.691/COCH/1995 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT / APPELLANT : ----------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON(SR.),SR.COUNSEL FOR IT SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ------------- SHRI.G.SUMANESAN,KAYAMKULAM. DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, LIC, THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ.-------------------------I.T.A. No. 55 of 2001 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 24[th] day of January, 2008 J U D G M E N T C.N.Ramachandran Nair, J. Even though the I.T.Appeal remains defective for the reasonthat notice is not served on the respondent assessee, we feel appealcan be disposed of on merits because the issue is already coveredvide the Division Bench decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. T.K.Ginarajan, Development Officer, LIC ofIndia, reported in 253 ITR 463. If notice is served on therespondent, it will not benefit him as this Court will certainly followthe Division Bench judgment and decide the matter accordingly. Inthe circumstances, this appeal is allowed by answering the questionreferred i.e. incentive bonus as part of salary in favour of therevenue and against the assessee and by reversing the order of theTribunal. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)