Case LawHigh Court › Ita/198/2002 Of K.p. Chandradasan v. The...

Ita/198/2002 Of K.p. Chandradasan v. The Commissioner Of Incometax

High Court 17 Mar 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/198/2002 Of K.p. Chandradasan v. The Commissioner Of Incometax
Date of order
17 Mar 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Ita/198/2002 Of K.p. Chandradasan v. The Commissioner Of Incometax, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Issue: The only question raised is whether the assessee isentitled to depreciation in the computation of income for the block periodunder Chapter XIV of the Income Tax Act.

Decision: We do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal.Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
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 17TH MARCH 2008 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1929 ITA.No. 198 of 2002 --------------------------- ITA.2/2000 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/ RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------- SRI.K.P.CHANDRADASAN, CONTRACTOR, LAKSHMI NIVAS, POST PANTHEERANKAVU, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN, SRI.V.P. MOHANDAS. RESPONDENT/ APPELLANT: ----------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL,GOI(TAXES), SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. Ramachandran Nair &T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I.T.A.No.198 of 2002 - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Standing Counselfor the Department. The only question raised is whether the assessee isentitled to depreciation in the computation of income for the block periodunder Chapter XIV of the Income Tax Act. On going through the order ofthe Tribunal, we find that in the course of assessment, the assessee and thedepartment agreed for estimation of income at 7.5% of the gross profit forsome years and at 8% for the balance years. In view of the expressprovision contained in Section 158BB(4) of the Act, the assessee is notentitled to any set off of depreciation against the net income offered forassessment under the agreement. The clear finding of the Tribunal is thatthe assessee agreed in writing for the estimation of income at the rateprescribed above. We do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal.Therefore, we dismiss the appeal. (C.N. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, 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