Ita/6/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. S.gopalakrishnan Nair

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2009 / 16TH SRAVANA 1931 ITA.No. 6 of 2009() ------------------- ITA.234/COCH/2005 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT: -------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): --------------- S.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, ARSHIK HERBEL REMEDIES, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURM. ADV. SRI.K.ANAND (A.201) FOR R1 SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN FOR R1 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.....................................................................I.T. Appeal No.6 of 2009 ....................................................................Dated this the 7th day of August, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue and counselappearing for the assessee. Question raised is whether the Tribunalrightly upheld assessee's claim for deduction under Section 80I of theIncome Tax Act. Assessee is engaged in manufacture of hair oil whichhe claims to be a medicinal preparation. Cosmetics and toiletpreparations are in the negative list for the purpose of Section 80Ibenefit. Department's case is that the item sold by the appellant is acosmetic and toilet preparation falling in the negative list. However, itis seen from the records of the case that the department without anycontest allowed the claim for two other years pertaining to priorperiods. Besides this, when the appeal came up for hearing, counselfor the assessee brought to our notice Instruction No.5/2008 issued bythe CBDT fixing the threshold limit for the department to file appeal tothe High Courts, upto Rs.4 lakhs. The tax effect in this case is below the limit and the issue is allowed without contest by the Revenue for other years. We, therefore, do not proceed to decide the case on merits,but close the appeal leaving open the issue for the department to raisein appropriate situation. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudge pms C.K.ABDUL REHIM Judge