Case LawHigh Court › Ita/908/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Inco...

Ita/908/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Cochin v. Ernakulam Karayogam Kochi

High Court 09 Sep 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/908/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Cochin v. Ernakulam Karayogam Kochi
Date of order
09 Sep 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Ita/908/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Cochin v. Ernakulam Karayogam Kochi, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

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 V.K.MOHANAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 18TH BHADRA 1931 ITA.No. 908 of 2009() --------------------- ITA.227/COCH/2002 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(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- ERNAKULAM KARAYOGAM, DARBAR HALL ROAD,COCHIN-16. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/09/2009, ALONG WITH ITA NO.710 OF 2009 & ITA NO. 825 OF 2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ON 09/09/2009, ALONG WITH ITA NO.710 OF 2009 & ITA NO. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. .................................................................... I.T. Appeal Nos.908, 710 & 825 of 2009 ....................................................................Dated this the 9th day of September, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant. Respondent-assessee is admittedly eligible for exemption frompayment of income tax under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act. Infact, registration was granted under Section 12A of the Income TaxAct. However, the Assessing Officer declined exemption for thereason that surplus income was deposited in Co-operative Bank asagainst in investments in terms of Section 11(5) of the Act. Oncoming to know about the same, the assessee converted the deposit todeposit permissible under Section 11(5) of the Act. The first appellateauthority as well as the Tribunal found that there is only technicaldefect which should not lead to denial of exemption, particularly whenthe assessee has rectified the mistake. We do not find any ground to interfere with the orders of the Tribunal. Consequently appeals aredismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudge pms V.K.MOHANANJudge
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