Ramachandran Nair, J v. Above Referred
High Court
19 Oct 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ramachandran Nair, J v. Above Referred
Date of order
19 Oct 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Ramachandran Nair, J v. Above Referred, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal.
Decision: Appeals are accordingly dismissed as not maintainable.
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 C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN
MONDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2009 / 27TH ASWINA 1931
ITA.No. 203 of 2009()
---------------------
ITA.345/COCH/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH
....................
APPELLANT
-----------------------------
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM
BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX
RESPONDENT(S):
---------------
SRI.M.C. MATHEW, MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS, KOTTAYAM.(DIED)
ADDL. SRI. SAJAN VARGHESE, SON OF LATE M.C. MATHEW,
MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS
KOTTAYAM.
ADDL. RESPONDENT WAS IMPLEADED VIDE VAKKALATH FILED
AS PER THE DIRECTION OF COURT.
ADV. SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E) FOR R1
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19/10/2009, ALONG WITH ITA NO. 230 OF 2009 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &V.K. MOHANAN, JJ.
--------------------------------------------
I.T.A. Nos. 203, 230, 319, 336,378,414,430,436,440,446459,464,514, 589,591,599,600,1006, 1115 & 1025 OF 2009
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of October, 2009
JUDGMENT
Ramachandran Nair, J.
When these appeals were taken up for admission, Sri. P.Balakrishnan appearing for the respondent in all these cases raised apreliminary objection stating that appeals are not maintainable underInstruction 5 of 2008 dated 15.5.2008 issued by the Central Board ofDirect Taxes because tax effect in all these cases is below Rs. 4 lakhs.He has also relied on the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT V.MADHUKAR K. INAMDAR (HUF), (2009) 27 DTR (Bom.) 132 andCIT V. POLYCOTT CORPORATION, (2009) 20 DTR (Bom.) 16. Wefind force in this contention because the tax effect in all these appeals ismuch below Rs. 4 lakhs. Therefore the appeals filed by the revenue arenot maintainable by virtue of the provision contained in the circular
above referred.
Appeals are accordingly dismissed as not maintainable.
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)
Judge.
(V.K. MOHANAN)
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.