Ita/334/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cochin v. M/S.a.geeri Pai Jewellers, Broadway
High Court
30 Sep 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/334/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cochin v. M/S.a.geeri Pai Jewellers, Broadway
Date of order
30 Sep 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Ita/334/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cochin v. M/S.a.geeri Pai Jewellers, Broadway, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: We,therefore, dismiss the appeal.
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 K.SURENDRA MOHAN
THURSDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 8TH ASWINA 1932
ITA.No. 334 of 2010()
---------------------
ITA.108/COCH/2005 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH
....................
APPELLANT/APPELLANT
-----------------------------
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN .
BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:
---------------
M/S.A.GEERI PAI JWELLERS,
BROADWAY,ERNAKULAM-31.
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 30/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
....................................................................I.T. Appeal No.334 of 2010
....................................................................Dated this the 30th day of September, 2010.
JUDGMENT
Ramachandran Nair, J.
After hearing Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant andafter going through the Tribunal's order, we notice that the questionsraised are pure questions of fact and two lower authorities concurrentlyfound that there is no suppression as alleged by the department. We,therefore, dismiss the appeal.
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudge
pms
K.SURENDRA MOHANJudge
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.
EaseValue