Rp/1106/2019 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. The Fertilizers And Chemicals Travancore Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.155 OF 2020 IN ITA. 1222/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 1222/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOCHI-682 018 BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: THE FEDERAL BANK LTDFEDERAL TOWERS, ALUVA SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18.03.2020,ALONG WITH RP.985/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAMEDAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1061 OF 2019 IN ITA. 1195/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 1195/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOCHI - 1, KOCHI. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT IN ITA: M/S. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD.,FEDERAL TOWERS, ALUVA- 683 101 BY SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1123 OF 2019 IN ITA. 533/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 533/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKOCHI-1, KOCHI BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S.THE FEDERAL BANK LTDFEDERAL TOWERS, ALUVA. BY SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.287 OF 2020 IN ITA. 1116/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 1116/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE PRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THRISSUR BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S. SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.MISSION QUARTERS, THRISSUR. BY SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.991 OF 2019 IN ITA. 570/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 570/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,THRISSUR.BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S.SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.,MISSION QUARTERS, THRISSUR - 680 001 SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.991 OF 2019 IN ITA. 570/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 570/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,THRISSUR.BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S.SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.,MISSION QUARTERS, THRISSUR - 680 001 SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.985 OF 2019 IN ITA. 1092/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 1092/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXTHRISSUR BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: DHANALAKSHMI BANK LTD.NAIKKANAL, THRISSUR - 680 001 SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1034 OF 2019 IN ITA. 98/2012 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 98/2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXTHRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT IN ITA: M/S. DHANALEKSHMI BANK LTD.NAIKKANAL, THRISSUR. SRI.MOHAN PULIKKAL THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.285 OF 2020 IN ITA. 116/2012 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 116/2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,THRISSUR. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT IN ITA: M/S.DHANALAKSHMI BANK LTD.,NAIKKANAL, THRISSUR. SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1277 OF 2019 IN ITA. 873/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 873/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOCHI-1, KOCHI.BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S.HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTD.,WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI- 682 003 SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1124 OF 2019 IN ITA. 88/2013 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 88/2013 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKOCHI-1, KOCHI -682 018. RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S.HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTD.,WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI- 682 003 SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1124 OF 2019 IN ITA. 88/2013 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 88/2013 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKOCHI-1, KOCHI -682 018. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S. HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTD.WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1058 OF 2019 IN ITA. 703/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 703/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI.X BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S.HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTD.WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1066 OF 2019 IN ITA. 1084/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 1084/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKOCHI-1, KOCHI BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S.HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTDWILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1118 OF 2019 IN ITA. 922/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 922/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,KOCHI - 1, KOCHI. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S. HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTD.,WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI . SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1031 OF 2019 IN ITA. 1060/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 1060/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOCHI - 1, KOCHI. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT IN ITA: M/S.HARRISONS MALAYALAM LIMITED,WILLINGTON ISLAND, KOCHI - 682 003 SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1031 OF 2019 IN ITA. 1060/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 1060/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOCHI - 1, KOCHI. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT IN ITA: M/S.HARRISONS MALAYALAM LIMITED,WILLINGTON ISLAND, KOCHI - 682 003 SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1103 OF 2019 IN ITA. 879/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 879/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOCHI-1, KOCHIBY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S.HARRISONS MALAYAM LTD.,WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI- 682 003 SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1106 OF 2019 IN ITA. 121/2010 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 121/2010 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKOCHI-1, KOCHI.BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD., UDYOGAMANDAL, ELOOR, KOCHI - 683 501 SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1273 OF 2019 IN ITA. 872/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 872/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOCHI-1, KOCHI. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S. THE FEDERAL BANK LTDFEDERAL TOWERS, ALUVA-683 101 SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1115 OF 2019 IN ITA. 69/2012 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 69/2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXTHIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S.KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONLTD.,KESTON ROAD, KOWDIAR.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1115 OF 2019 IN ITA. 69/2012 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 69/2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXTHIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S.KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONLTD.,KESTON ROAD, KOWDIAR.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1072 OF 2019 IN ITA. 123/2012 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 123/2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXTHIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KESTON ROAD, KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1158 OF 2019 IN ITA. 1662/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 1662/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN ITA: THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX THRISSUR BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT IN ITA: M/S.SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTDMISSION QUARTERS, THRISSUR- 680 001 : SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.1161 OF 2019 IN ITA. 16/2013 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 16/2013 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN ITA: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKOCHI -1, KOCHI. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT IN ITA: M/S. HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTD.WILLINGTON ISLAND, KOCHI -682 003 SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.328 OF 2020 IN ITA. 1151/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 1151/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKOCHI BY ADVS.SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAXSRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.) RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S.HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTDWILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI - 682 003 SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.328 OF 2020 IN ITA. 1151/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 1151/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKOCHI BY ADVS.SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAXSRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.) RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA: M/S.HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTDWILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI - 682 003 SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.329 OF 2020 IN ITA. 712/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 712/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXTHRISSUR BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT IN ITA: M/S.DHANALAKSHMI BANK LTDNAIKKANAL, THISSUR SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.327 OF 2020 IN ITA. 186/2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 186/2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKOCHI BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT IN ITA: POPULAR VEHICLES AND SERVICES LTD.MAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 RP.No.326 OF 2020 IN ITA. 815/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA 815/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKOCHI, KOCHI BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT IN ITA: M/S.THE FEDERAL BANK LTD.FEDERAL TOWERS, ALUVA SRI. V.ABRAHAM MARKOS THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER [ RP.155/2020, RP.1061/2019, RP.1123/2019, RP.287/2020,RP.991/2019, RP.985/2019, RP.1034/2019, RP.285/2020,RP.1277/2019, RP.1124/2019, RP.1058/2019, RP.1066/2019,RP.1118/2019, RP.1031/2019, RP.1103/2019, RP.1106/2019,RP.1273/2019, RP.1115/2019, RP.1072/2019, RP.1158/2019,RP.1161/2019, RP.328/2020, RP.329/2020, RP.327/2020, RP.326/2020 K. Vinod Chandran, J. REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN ITA: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKOCHI, KOCHI BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT IN ITA: M/S.THE FEDERAL BANK LTD.FEDERAL TOWERS, ALUVA SRI. V.ABRAHAM MARKOS THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON18.03.2020, ALONG WITH RP.155/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER [ RP.155/2020, RP.1061/2019, RP.1123/2019, RP.287/2020,RP.991/2019, RP.985/2019, RP.1034/2019, RP.285/2020,RP.1277/2019, RP.1124/2019, RP.1058/2019, RP.1066/2019,RP.1118/2019, RP.1031/2019, RP.1103/2019, RP.1106/2019,RP.1273/2019, RP.1115/2019, RP.1072/2019, RP.1158/2019,RP.1161/2019, RP.328/2020, RP.329/2020, RP.327/2020, RP.326/2020 K. Vinod Chandran, J. The batch of review Petitions have been filed against thedeletion of disallowance made under Section 14A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (For brevity, 'the Act of 1961). ThisCourt, in the appeals, filed by both the Revenue and theassessee, found that, as per the binding precedent of theHon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax V.Essar Teleholdings Ltd. [(2018) 401 ITR 445 (SC), such dis-allowance could be made only from the assessment year2007-2008. This was held to be so for reason of theincorporation of the machinery provisions under Rule 8D ofthe Income Tax Rules in the year 2006, the Explanatory Notesin the Finance Bill 2006, clarification in the Circular dated28.12.2006 and the methodology having been changed in theyear 2016, which was expressly stated to be prospective. 2.Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue submitted that the decision in Essar Teleholdings(supra)itself finds that Section 14A of the Act is fullyworkable without there being any mechanism provided forcomputing the expenditure as noticed in para 36. 3. We have to immediately notice that it is not thedictum of the decision and their Lordships expressedotherwise in paragraphs 36, 37 & 40, all of which we extracthereunder: -36.It is to be noted that Section 14A wasinserted by the Finance Act, 2001 and the provisionswere fully workable without their being anymechanism provided for computing the expenditure.Although Section 14-A was made effective from 1-4-1962 but proviso was immediately inserted by theFinance Act, 2002, providing that Section 14-A shallnot empower the assessing officer either to reassessunder Section 147 or pass an order enhancing theassessment or reducing a refund already made orotherwise increasing the liability of the assesseesunder Section 154, for any assessment year beginningon or before 1-4-2001. Thus, all concludedtransactions prior to 1-4-2001 were made final andnot allowed to be reopened. 37.The memorandum of explanationexplaining the provisions of the Finance Act, 2006 has-clearly mentioned that Section 14 subsection (2) and -subsection (3) shall be effective with effect from-Assessment Year 20062007 alone which is anotherindicator that provision was intended to operateprospectively. XXX XXX XXX 40. In the present case, methodology as providedunder Rule 8-D was neither a well-known nor well-settled mode of computation. The new mode ofcomputation was brought in place by Rule 8-D. Noassessing officer, even in his imagination could haveapplied the methodology, which was brought in place--by Rule 8B. Thus, retrospective operation of Rule 8Bcannot be accepted on the strength of law laid downby this Court in the above case. Underlining by us for emphasis It cannot hence be said that there could have been a computation applied even without the machinery provision. 4. The learned Standing Counsel placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godrej & Boyce XXX XXX XXX 40. In the present case, methodology as providedunder Rule 8-D was neither a well-known nor well-settled mode of computation. The new mode ofcomputation was brought in place by Rule 8-D. Noassessing officer, even in his imagination could haveapplied the methodology, which was brought in place--by Rule 8B. Thus, retrospective operation of Rule 8Bcannot be accepted on the strength of law laid downby this Court in the above case. Underlining by us for emphasis It cannot hence be said that there could have been a computation applied even without the machinery provision. 4. The learned Standing Counsel placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godrej & Boyce -Manufacturing Co. Ltd V. Deputy Commissioner of IncomeTax and Another [(2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) to contend thateven before Essar Teleholdings'case, Honourable SupremeCourt had accepted that dis-allowance under Section 14A ofthe Act, was valid and possible especially looking at the legislative intend of the provision. We need only extract paraof Essar Teleholdings to reject the above contention: 50. It is relevant to note that the impugned judgmentin this appeal relies on the earlier judgment of theBombay High Court in Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v.CIT, where the Division Bench of the Bombay High Courtafter elaborately considering the principles to determinethe prospectivity or retrospectivity of the amendmenthas concluded that Rule 8-D is prospective in nature.Against the aforesaid judgment of the Bombay HighCourt dated 12-8-2010 an appeal was filed in this Courtwhich has been decided vide its judgment in Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT[(2017) 7 SCC 421 ]. ThisCourt, while deciding the above appeal, repelled thechallenge raised by the assessee regarding vires ofSection 14-A. In para 36 of the judgment, this Courtnoticed that with regard to retrospectivity of provisionsRevenue had filed appeal, hence the said question wasnot gone into the aforesaid appeal. In the above case,this Court specifically left the question of retrospectivityto be decided in other appeals filed by the Revenue. Wethus have proceeded to decide the question of-retrospectivity of Rule 8D in these appeals. Underlining by us for emphasis We need not hence place any reliance on Godrej & BoyceMfg. Co. Ltd. (supra) to decide on the retrospectivity. 5. We also rely on a three Judge Bench decision of -the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of IncomeTax,Bangalore v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty [(1981) 128 ITR 294].There, the question was slightly different in so far as thecomputation provisions not being applicable, in which event itwas held that the issue was not intended to fall within thecharging section. We are concerned with the declaration that''the Charging section and the computation provisiontogether constitute an integrated provision''. Hence, onlywhen the machinery provisions for computation came into theRules, there could have been a dis-allowance under Section14A of the Act especially when sub-sections (2) & (3) ofSection 14A came into the statute in 2006, just before Rule8D. 6.We also notice that in another appeal, ITA No.830of 2009 dated 06.12.2018, wherein the question raised wasanswered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue,again relying on Essar Teleholdings, the Revenue took it upbefore the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the SLP stooddismissed by an order dated 06.12.2018. RP.No.155 OF 2020 IN ITA. 1222/2009&CONN.CASES 31 For all the above reasons, we find no reason to review the judgments to the extent of the finding on applicability ofSection 14A. The review petitions are accordingly dismissedinlimine. Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE ajt Sd/- ASHOK MENON, JUDGE