Case LawHigh Court › Ramachandran Nair, J v. Assessing Office...

Ramachandran Nair, J v. Assessing Officer Will Rectify The Same For Subsequent Years

High Court 24 Nov 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ramachandran Nair, J v. Assessing Officer Will Rectify The Same For Subsequent Years
Date of order
24 Nov 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Ramachandran Nair, J v. Assessing Officer Will Rectify The Same For Subsequent Years, the High Court (2009) allowed the appeal.

Decision: Appeal is allowed as above.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 ITA.No. 1063 of 2009() ---------------------- ITA.928/COCH/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,COCHIN BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): --------------- M/S.TRACO CABLE CO.LTD., KSHB COMPLEX, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-36. ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN FOR R1 SRI.TOMSON T EMMANUEL FOR R1 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &V.K. MOHANAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard standing counsel for the appellant and counsel appearingfor the respondent. Even though the Supreme Court has in CIT V.HCL COMNET SYSTEMS AND SERVICES LTD., (2008) 305 I.T.R.409 (SC) decided the issue in favour of the assessee, the judgment ofthe Supreme Court is neutralised through amendment introduced toExplanation (1) to Section 115JB(2) with retrospective effect from1.4.2001. By virtue of the amendment with retrospective effect, thedecisions of the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal have necessarily to bevacated and we do so. The matter is remanded to the assessing officerfor recomputation of liability based on amendment above referred.However, we make it clear that the assessee is entitled to claimdeduction of debt in the year in which it was written off and if therewas disallowance in those years on account of Tribunal's order, the assessing officer will rectify the same for subsequent years. Appeal is allowed as above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)Judge. (V.K. MOHANAN) Judge. kk
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