Case LawHigh Court › Ita/47/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Incom...

Ita/47/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.national Electrical Corporation

High Court 24 Feb 2009 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/47/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.national Electrical Corporation
Date of order
24 Feb 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Ita/47/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.national Electrical Corporation, the High Court (2009) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: We notice from Annexure-C order that thevery same issue arose for the same year before the Tribunal in anappeal filed against Section 263 order wherein Tribunal confirmed theorder of the Commissioner of Income Tax.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

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 TUESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1930 ITA.No. 47 of 2008() -------------------- ITA.1233/COCH/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: -------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT RESPONDENT(S): --------------- M/S.NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CORPORATION,NEAR STONE BRIDGE, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.V.V.ASOKAN FOR R1 SMT.S.AMINA FOR R1 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/02/2009, THE COURT ON 24/02/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. .................................................................... I.T. Appeal No.47 of 2008 .................................................................... Dated this the 24th day of February, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Question raised pertains to respondent-assessee's statuts asregistered firm or as AOP. We notice from Annexure-C order that thevery same issue arose for the same year before the Tribunal in anappeal filed against Section 263 order wherein Tribunal confirmed theorder of the Commissioner of Income Tax. It is conceded byassessee's counsel that the appeal filed against Annexure-C orderbefore this court was unsuccessful. Consequent upon finality ofAnnexure-C order, it was not open for the assessee to reagitate thestatus issue again. Therefore, the C.I.T.(Appeals) rightly held that thefinding of the Commissioner in Section 263 proceedings on status willbind the Assessing Officer. We do not find any jurisdiction for theTribunal to entertain an appeal on this issue in the revised proceedingsand to allow the assessee's claim that they are entitled to be assessed as a registered firm. The appeal filed by the Revenue is therefore allowedby reversing the order of the Tribunal and by restoring the order of theC.I.T. (Appeals). C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudge pms K.SURENDRA MOHANJudge
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