Ita/857/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Arpitha Tourist Home

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1933 ITA.No. 857 of 2009() --------------------- ITA.209/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------ THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT: --------------- ARPITHA TOURIST HOME, COCHIN-682 018, C/O.M/S.PETER AND KARUNAKAR, ALFA TOWERS, I.S.PRESS ROAD, COCHIN-18. ADV. SRI.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA FOR R1 SRI.TERRY V.JAMES FOR R1 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/11/2011, ALONG WITH ITA NO. 970 OF 2009 ITA NO. 1248 OF 2009 ITA NO. 1286 OF 2009 ITA NO. 1299 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE A: COPY OF ORDER U/S 143(3) R/W SEC.147 OF THE INCOME TAXACT DT.30.7.2002 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99ACT DT.30.7.2002 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99 ANNEXURE B: COPY OF ORDER DT.18.12.2003 OF THE COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX (APPEALS)INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ANNEXURE C:COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.5.2006 OF THE INCOME TAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN IN ITA NO.209/COCH/2004APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN IN ITA NO.209/COCH/2004 RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, &K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JJ ---------------------------------------------------- ITA Nos. 857, 970, 1286, 1248 & 1299 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18[th] day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J The issue raised is whether respondent - assessee isentitled to be assessed as a registered firm under section185 of the Income Tax Act. Respondent-assessee wasassessed as an “Association of Persons”(for short AOP) bythe Assessment Officer after rejecting their contentionthat they are eligible to be assessed as a registered firmunder section 185 of the IT Act. The reason for denial ofregistration is that the partnership firm did not havelicence under the Abkari laws in its own name but on theother hand, licene obtained by one of the partners wasexploited by the Firm which carried on business. Thisissue stands decided in favour of the respondent vide aDivision Bench decision of this Court in TTA No546/2009 ITA Nos.857/2009 and connected. : 2 : dated 29.11.2010. Following the said judgment,wedismiss the connected appeals filed by the Revenueagainst the same assessee. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR(Judge) K. VINOD CHANDRAN (Judge) jma