Case LawHigh Court › Ita/174/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Inco...

Ita/174/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Cochin v. M/S.muthoot Leasing And Finance Ltd

High Court 29 Jun 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/174/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Cochin v. M/S.muthoot Leasing And Finance Ltd
Date of order
29 Jun 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Remanded

Case summary

In Ita/174/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Cochin v. M/S.muthoot Leasing And Finance Ltd, the High Court (2009) remanded the matter.

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 C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2009 / 8TH ASHADHA 1931 ITA.No. 174 of 2009() --------------------- ITA.1/COCH/2001 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/ APPELLANT(S): -------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): --------------- M/S MUTHOOT LEASING AND FINANCE LTD., MUTHOOT CHAMBERS, BANERJI ROAD, COCHIN -18. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------- I.T.A. No. 174 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 29[th] day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T---------------------- Ramachandran Nair,J. The assessee by mistake returned interest received from amotor company on advance paid for purchase of vehicle forpurpose of assessment of interest tax under the Interest Tax Act,which provides for tax only on interest received on loan andadvances. The assessee, after disposal of appeal, filed arectification application before the Tribunal and Tribunalremanded the case to the assessing officer against which thisappeal is filed. We find from the argument of the standingcounsel that the department's argument is only technical and onmerits the matter is still left to the officer to decide. We do notfind anything wrong with the Tribunal's order in remanding thecase for consideration on merits, more so in a case where thecase of the assessee is prima facie tenable. We therefore dismissthe appeal. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, 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