Ita/10/2018 Of M/S.blastline India v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI WEDNESDAY, THE 2 DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1943 ITA NO. 10 OF 2018 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 304/2015 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH APPELLANT/S: M/S.BLASTLINE INDIA 48/34, A-4, KALOOR PERANDOOR ROAD, ELAMAKKARA P.O., KOCHI-682026, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, (PAN ), REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MR.JOSEKUTTY ANTONY. BY ADVS. SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE (SR.) SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS SRI.ISAAC THOMAS SRI.P.G.CHANDAPILLAI ABRAHAM SHRI.VIPIN ANTO H.M. SHRI.SHARAD JOSEPH KODANTHARA SMT.ZAINAB ZEBAIBRAHIM P.M. RESPONDENT/S: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C R BUILDINGS, I.S. PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KOCHI-682018 BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.P.K.R.MENONSR.COUNSEL GOITAXES SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT S.V.Bhatti,J. M/s. Blastline India/assessee is the appellant. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ernakulam District, Kochi/Revenue is the respondent. 2. The assessee is being aggrieved by the order dated 04.10.2017 in ITA No.304/Coch/2015 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') is in appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'). In the instant appeal, the issues relate to the assessment year 2010-11. The circumstances relevant for the disposal of the appeal are stated thus: 2.1. The assessee claims to be a partnership firm and has filed return for the assessment year 2010-11. The return deals with the remuneration to partners amounting to Rs.1,75,54,584/-. The Assessing Officer disallowed the expenditure paid as remuneration to the partners and the same was confirmed by the Appellate Authority as well as the Tribunal. The Tribunal in the order impugned before us, after examining the case of the assessee and the Revenue, held that it is not convinced to accept the claim of remuneration paid to the partners as paid to working partners, particularly in the absence of positive proof showing that the partners on whom the remuneration has been booked are working partners. Vide order dated 02.03.2022, we have permitted the assessee to bring on record the additional material and after perusing the material, we are of the view that the Tribunal ought to be allowed to reconsider the issue as evidence is brought on record on the status of the partners for whom remuneration is booked by the assessee-firm. The matter requires reconsideration by the Tribunal. Hence the order under appeal is set aside, the matter remitted to the Tribunal for consideration and disposal afresh in accordance with law. The assessee is given liberty to file the very documents filed in the instant appeal by enclosing a copy of the judgment within three months from today. Sd/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE Sd/- BASANT BALAJIJUDGE JS