Ita/26/2002 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Kochi v. M/S.abad Fisheries, Kochi

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 WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 17TH MAGHA 1929 ITA.No. 26 of 2002() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18/7/2001 IN COCH. IN ITA.365/1991 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:- --------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON(SR.),SC FOR IT SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:- ----------------------------------------- M/S. ABAD FISHERIIES, COCHIN - 2. BY ADV. SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E) SRI.R.AMRITHARAJ THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/02/2008 ALONG WITH ITA.NO.29/2002, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THEFOLLOWING: C.N. Ramachandran Nair &T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I.T.A.NOs.26 & 29 of 2002 - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6[th] day of February, 2008. JUDGMENT C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. These appeals are filed by the Revenue against the order of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal disposing of assessee's appeals for theassessment years 1986-87 and 1987-88. The assessee was engaged inexports and claimed the benefit of deduction on export profits under Section80HHC. The assessing officer without verifying the break up details ofprofit which included profits on sale of imported goods, accepted the returnby passing orders under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act whichprovides for summary assessment based on return filed. Even though theCommissioner issued suo-motu order revising the summary assessmentissued under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act, the Tribunal cancelled the sameon the ground that there were no mistakes or illegality in the order issued bythe officer under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act. We are in agreement withthe finding of the Tribunal, because the section prior to the amendmentprovided for rectification of arithmetical errors in the return or accounts ordocuments accompanying it and there were no provisions for disallowing ITA 26 & 29/2002 even prima facie inadmissible deductions claimed by the assessee. Since the order issued under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act was free from anydefect or illegality, the Commissioner has no jurisdiction to revise theintimation so issued under Section 253 of the Act. We, therefore, dismiss the appeals upholding the order of theTribunal. (C.N. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/ -3- C.N. Ramachandran Nair &T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -I.T.A. Nos.26 & 29 of 2002- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT 6[th] February, 2008.