Op/23451/1999 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Tvm v. Sri.p.gopalakrishnan Nair, Tvm

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2007 / 5TH SRAVANA 1929 OP.No. 23451 of 1999(S) ---------------------------------- ORDER IN RA 255/COCH/98 IN ITA.697/COCH/1995 OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TRIVANDRUM. BY STANDING COUNSEL, GOVT. OF INDIA (TAXES) SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.) SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE RESPONDENT: ---------------------- SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, CONTRACTOR, 'LEKSHMI NIVAS', PERUNTHANNY, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS VELLAPPALLY SRI.A.KUMAR THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------ O.P.No.23451 of 1999-S ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 27[th] day of July, 2007 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. The Revenue has filed this petition under Section 256(2) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short), inter alia, requesting us to direct the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal to state the case and refer the questions of law that wouldarise in I.T.A.No.697 of 1995 dated 5[th] March, 1998 for the assessment year1991-92. The questions of law raised by the Revenue are as under: “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in deleting theaddition amounting to Rs.1,93,030/- which represented securedadvance received by the assessee during the precedingprevious year and claimed as a deduction? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case is not the order of the Tribunal, unsupported bymaterial, without independent consideration, based on thesubmission of the Counsel and (to put in the language of theSupreme Court in 233 ITR 166) perverse?” (2) The Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. The Revenue had filed an application under Section 256(1) of the Act requestingthe Tribunal to state the case and refer the questions of law that would arise inI.T.A.No.697 of 1995 for the assessment year 1991-92. The Tribunal hasrejected the application. (3) We have carefully perused the order passed by the Tribunal andalso the questions of law raised by the Revenue for consideration and decisionby this Court. In our opinion, the questions of law raised by the Revenuerequire consideration by this Court. Therefore, a direction requires to be issued to the Tribunal to state the case and refer the questions of law that would arisein I.T.A.No.697 of 1995 dated 5.3.1998 for the assessment year 1991-92. (4) Accordingly, the following: Order i) The petition is allowed. ii) A direction is issued to the Tribunal to state the case and refer thequestions of law that would arise in I.T.A.No.697 of 1995 dated 5.3.1998 forthe assessment year 1991-92 for consideration and decision by this Court, asexpeditiously as possible. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE vns (K.T.SANKARAN) JUDGE