Case LawHigh Court › Ita/397/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Inco...

Ita/397/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Cochin v. Shri.jacob J.thaliath,Ocean Bounty,Kochi

High Court 16 Nov 2010 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/397/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Cochin v. Shri.jacob J.thaliath,Ocean Bounty,Kochi
Date of order
16 Nov 2010
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Ita/397/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Cochin v. Shri.jacob J.thaliath,Ocean Bounty,Kochi, the High Court (2010) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Since Section 263 orders are upheld, we allow both theseappeals by cancelling the orders of the Tribunal and byrestoring the assessment confirmed in first appeal.

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 TUESDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1932 ITA.No. 397 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA.1008/COCH/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT / RESPONDENT ----------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) RESPONDENT(S): / APPELLANT --------------- SRI.JACOB J.THALIATH, PROP. OCEAN BOUNTY, 26/1994, NEAR ST.JOSEPH CHURCH, K.P.VALLON ROAD, KOCHI - 682 020. ADV. SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E) FOR R1 SRI.V.SREEKUMAR FOR R1 SRI.MOHAN PULIKKAL FOR R1 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/11/2010, ALONG WITH ITA NO. 516 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ.---------------------------------- ITA Nos.397 & 516 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 16[th] day of November, 2010J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. These are appeals filed against revised assessments issued based on the Commissioner's orders under Section263. Today, we upheld the validity of those orders byreversing the orders of the Tribunal in ITA Nos.1037 & 1197 of2009. Since Section 263 orders are upheld, we allow both theseappeals by cancelling the orders of the Tribunal and byrestoring the assessment confirmed in first appeal. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JUDGE) jg
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