Ita/204/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Cochin v. M/S.apollo Tyres Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR THURSDAY ,THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 23RD PHALGUNA,1940 ITA.No. 204 of 2011 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 112/2004 ofI.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH APPELLANT/S: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, COCHIN. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/S: M/S.APOLLO TYRES LTD.6TH FLOOR,CHERUPUSHPAM BUILDINGS, SHANMUGHAM ROAD, KOCHI-682 031 BY ADVS.SRI.BINU MATHEWSRI.B.J.JOHN PRAKASHSRI.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA (SR.)SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHANSRI.TERRY V.JAMESSRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL)SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: I.T.A. No. 204 of 2011 JUDGMENT Ramachandra Menon, J. This appeal is at the instance of the Revenue.Challenge is against Annexure C order passed bythe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Benchfor the assessment year 1997 - '98. 2. The questions suggested by the appellantas involving substantial questions of law, are inthe following terms : 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case is not the commission payment to M/sSunrays Properties and Investment (P) Ltd. Diversionof funds and hence income of the assessee and theTribunal is justified in interfering with the order ofthe assessing officer in treating the amount asincome of the assessee ? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case and for the reasons stated in the order ofthe Assessing Officer and in view of the fact thatthese investment companies are part of the assesseecompany are not the incomes earned by the theincomes of the assessee as held by the AssessingOfficer ? I.T.A. No. 204 of 2011 3. When the matter is taken up forconsideration, it is brought to the notice of thisCourt by Sri. Christopher Abraham, the learnedstanding counsel appearing for the appellantRevenue, that exactly similar issue for anotherassessment year was considered by this Court andthe same stands answered against the Revenue, asper judgment dated 13.03.2019 in I.T.A. No. 973 of2011. 4. In the said circumstances, the appealstands disposed of in terms of the judgment dated13.03.2019 in I.T.A. No. 973 of 2011. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE Sd/- N.ANIL KUMAR JUDGE kmd/das