Ita/928/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cochin v. M/S.kerala State Civil Supplies Corpn
High Court
05 Aug 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/928/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cochin v. M/S.kerala State Civil Supplies Corpn
Date of order
05 Aug 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Ita/928/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cochin v. M/S.kerala State Civil Supplies Corpn, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: We,therefore, dismiss the department's appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
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 C.K.ABDUL REHIM
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2009 / 14TH SRAVANA 1931
ITA.No. 928 of 2009()
---------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29/01/2008 IN ITA.670/COCH/2006
of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH
....................
APPELLANT:
------------------------------
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
COCHIN.
BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX
RESPONDENT(S):
---------------
M/S.KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES
CORPN.LTD., KOCHI.
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 05/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.
....................................................................I.T. Appeal No.928 of 2009
....................................................................Dated this the 5th day of August, 2009.
JUDGMENT
Ramachandran Nair, J.
We do not find any ground to interfere with the Tribunal's order,wherein the Tribunal declined to entertain the appeal for the reason thatthe tax effect is below the threshold limit for filing appeal under CBDTnorms. Even though Standing Counsel submitted that loss is notreckoned by the Tribunal and there is some point in it, we notice thatthe reduction in loss is only from Rs.46 crores to Rs.45 crores. We,therefore, dismiss the department's appeal.
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudge
C.K.ABDUL REHIM Judge
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.