Case LawHigh Court › Ita/178/2001 Of The Commissioner Of Inco...

Ita/178/2001 Of The Commissioner Of Incometax, Cochin v. M/S.zeenath Theatre, Aluva

High Court 04 Feb 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/178/2001 Of The Commissioner Of Incometax, Cochin v. M/S.zeenath Theatre, Aluva
Date of order
04 Feb 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Ita/178/2001 Of The Commissioner Of Incometax, Cochin v. M/S.zeenath Theatre, Aluva, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: The appeal is therefore 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 T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 15TH MAGHA 1929 ITA.No. 178 of 2001() --------------------- ITA.763/COCH/1992 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT : ----------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON(SR.),SC FOR IT SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT RESPONDENTS: ------------- M/S. ZEENATH THEATRE, ALUVA. BY ADV. SRI.C.KOCHUNNY NAIR SRI.DALE P.KURIEN THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 4/2/2008 , THE COURT ON 04/02/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I.T.A.NO.178 of 2001 - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the [4th] day of February, 2008. JUDGMENT C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. The question raised in this appeal filed by the Revenue pertains tothe liability for capital gains on the surrender of shares by some partners infavour of the others in the partnership and the entitlement for depreciationfor the firm. On hearing the learned Senior Counsel appearing for theappellant and after perusing the order of the Tribunal, we find that theTribunal has entered a clear finding that there was no dissolution of therespondent firm and the reconstituted firm also continued to carry onbusiness. The liability for capital gains on transfer of shares by the partners,was introduced in the year 1988 and the assessment year involved in thiscase is 1983-84. In the circumstances and in view of the findings of the Tribunalabout the continuation of the business by the reconstituted firm, we do notfind any substantial question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal. The appeal is therefore dismissed. (C.N. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/ -2- C.N. Ramachandran Nair & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -I.T.A. No.178 of 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT 4[th] February, 2008.
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