Case LawHigh Court › Itr/4/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax...

Itr/4/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Commissioner Of Incopme Tax

High Court 17 Dec 2018 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Itr/4/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Commissioner Of Incopme Tax
Date of order
17 Dec 2018
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Itr/4/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Commissioner Of Incopme Tax, the High Court (2018) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON MONDAY ,THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940 ITR.No. 4 of 2012 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 230/1991 ofI.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH APPLICANT/S: CLEETUS VINCENT,C/O OCEANIC BUILDING,SAKTHIKULANGARA, KOLLAM. RESPONDENT/S: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXTRIVANDRUM. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON, SR.COUNSEL GOI TAXESSRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC FOR INCOME TAX THIS INCOME TAX REFERENCE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON17.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: O R D E R Vinod Chandran, J. The above Reference has come up to us based on anorder passed by the Tribunal in compliance with anorder dated 30.07.2007 of this Court under Section256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 inO.P.No.13717/1999. We find that the O.P. compelling Reference itself was filed by the assessee, who ishence, the person who sought the Reference. A noticewas issued from this Court, after the statement of thecase by the Tribunal was placed before us. Though anotice was attempted to be served on the assessee, thesame has been returned with the endorsement “closed andleft”. The assessee having filed an O.P. compelling Reference and this Court having allowed the samedirecting Reference of certain questions by theTribunal. It was the bounden duty of the assessee topursue the matter diligently. The assessment yearbeing 1980-81, the present Reference itself has beenpending here from 2012 onwards. In such circumstances, we refuse to answer the questions of law and this Reference stands closed for non-prosecution. Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE Sd/- Sd/- ASHOK MENONJUDGE
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