Ita/106/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Poyilakada Fisheries Ltd, Kollam

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON THURSDAY ,THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940 ITA.No. 106 of 2009 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 813/2005 ofI.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 21-01-2008 APPELLANT/S: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXTHIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/S:M/S. POYILAKADA FISHERIES LTD, KOLLAM.KOLLAM. BY ADVS.SRI.P.BENNY THOMASSRI.JOSON MANAVALANSRI.K.JOHN MATHAISRI.KURYAN THOMASSRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIARSRI.P.GOPINATHSRI.SANDEEP GOPALAKRISHNAN OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Vinod Chandran, J The Tribunal dismissed the appeal on theground that the demand raised from the orderappealed against is lower than the mandatorylimit as prescribed under the Litigation Policyfor maintaining an appeal before the Tribunal.The question raised was with respect to therevised return filed declaring loss ofRs.7,60,87,930/- as against the earlier lossdeclared of Rs.3,50,00,000/-. There wasabsolutely no tax effect for the subjectassessment year. The learned Senior StandingCounsel, Government of India (Taxes) submittedthat the mere fact that there was no taxeffect for that year would not determine the monetory limit, especially since the assesseecould have earned profits in the subsequentyears and if that exceeded the limit,definitely there was a scope for considerationas to whether the revised return was proper ornot. Hence we directed the revenue to file astatement as to the details of the returns forthe subsequent year. The Department has todayfiled a statement clearly indicating that inthe next eight years the assessee has beendeclaring a loss. Since loss could be carriedover only for eight years, we do not think thatthe consideration of the appeal is expedientespecially since this would not create any taxliability on the assessee for the subsequentyears also for reason of the declaration ofloss in the subsequent 8 years during which ITA 106/2009 4 period alone the loss could be carried over. IT Appeal would stand closed leaving the question of law open. No order as to costs. Sd/-K. Vinod Chandran,Judge Sd/-Ashok Menon, Judge jma ITA 106/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE-A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSINGOFFICER DATED 29/12/1998. ANNEXURE-B TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 17/03/2005. ANNEXURE-CTRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATETRIBUNAL DATED 21/01/2008. ANNEXURE-D TRUE COPY OF THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO.2/2005 DATED 24/10/2005.