Ita/33/2011 Of Pala Marketing Co-Operative Society Ltd v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
14 Mar 2011 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/33/2011 Of Pala Marketing Co-Operative Society Ltd v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
14 Mar 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Ita/33/2011 Of Pala Marketing Co-Operative Society Ltd v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY
MONDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2011 / 23RD PHALGUNA 1932
ITA.No. 33 of 2011()
--------------------
ITA.50/2009 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH
....................
APPELLANT: APPELLANT
--------------------
PALA MARKETING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
LTD. NO. 4214, PALA, KOTTAYAM, KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT SECRETARY.
BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
SMT.NISHA JOHN
SRI.ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL
RESPONDENT(S):
---------------
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.
BY SC SRI. JOSE JOSEPH
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 14/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
--------------------------------------------
I. T. A. No. 33 of 2011
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of March, 2011
JUDGMENT
Ramachandran Nair, J.
This appeal is filed against the order of the Tribunal remandingthe appellant's claim for interest on refund to the assessing officer.Before us, counsel for the appellant contended that the assessing officerhas passed orders rejecting the claim. Counsel has raised variouscontentions stating that delay in refund is not attributable to theassessee and so much so assessee is entitled to interest under Section244A of the I.T. Act. Standing counsel submitted that the assessee didnot file return in time and only on the basis of direction issued by thisCourt refund was considered and granted to the assessee. We feel,there is no need for us to decide the issue because since the assessingofficer has rejected the claim, appellant has a remedy by way ofrevision before the Commissioner. Having regard to the nature of thecontentions raised, we feel Commissioner will closely examine theappellant's entitlement with reference to the circumstances that led to
the delay in filing the claim for refund and based on the provisions ofthe statute.
Appeal is closed leaving freedom to the appellant to file revisionbefore the Commissioner.
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)Judge.
(BHABANI PRASAD RAY)
Judge.
kk
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.