Case LawHigh Court › Ita/1042/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income...

Ita/1042/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cochin v. Toja Tyre & Treads Pvt Ltd

High Court 19 Mar 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/1042/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cochin v. Toja Tyre & Treads Pvt Ltd
Date of order
19 Mar 2010
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Ita/1042/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cochin v. Toja Tyre & Treads Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: The question raised in this appeal is whether the Tribunal wasjustified in cancelling the set off of undisclosed income estimated onprotective basis against carry forward of losses.

Decision: Consequently appeal is dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 ITA.No. 1042 of 2009() ---------------------- ITA.458/2006 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT --------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------- M/S.TOJA TYRES & TREADS PVT LTD., KALADY. ADV. SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E) FOR R1 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ.--------------------------- I.T.Appeal No. 1042 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 19[th ]day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. The question raised in this appeal is whether the Tribunal wasjustified in cancelling the set off of undisclosed income estimated onprotective basis against carry forward of losses. It is seen that the verysame income was assessed on a regular basis in the hands of theassessee namely Tolin Rubbers (P) Ltd., which was cancelled in appealby the CIT (Appeal) in an appeal filed by the said assessee. Sincesubstantive additions are cancelled in the hands of the other assessee,the Tribunal held that the assessing officer was not justified in setting offthe amount assessed on protective basis against carry forward of losses.It is seen that in connected cases the CIT (Appeal), cancelled theassessment made on protective basis. In any case since the additionitself is cancelled in appeal filed against the assessee on protective basisin the case of Tolin Rubbers (P) Ltd, we do not find any substantialquestion of law arising from the order of the Tribunal. Consequently appeal is dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR (JUDGE ) P.S.GOPINATHAN (JUDGE )
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