Rp/353/2012 Of M/S.abad Fisheries v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kochi
High Court
27 Sep 2012 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Rp/353/2012 Of M/S.abad Fisheries v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kochi
Date of order
27 Sep 2012
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Rp/353/2012 Of M/S.abad Fisheries v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kochi, the High Court (2012) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: This Review Petition is filed pointing out the mistake in the judgment because this Court has stated that the CIT(Appeal)'s order for the year 2002-03 shall stand set aside.However, we notice that the appeal itself is restored to theTribunal, whereunder the Tribunal has to consider thecorrectness an...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN
THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/5TH ASWINA 1934
RP.No. 353 of 2012 () IN ITA/258/2010
--------------------------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 27/09/2012 IN ITA.258/2010
REVIEW PETITIONER(S):/ RESPONDENT--------------------
M/S.ABAD FISHERIES,
KOCHANGADI, KOCHI-2.
BY ADV. SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E)
RESPONDENT(S):/ APPELLANT
--------------
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOCHI.
BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-09-2012, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
....................................................................
in
....................................................................
Dated this the 27[th] day of September, 2012.
O R D E R
Ramachandran Nair, J.
This Review Petition is filed pointing out the mistake in
the judgment because this Court has stated that the CIT(Appeal)'s order for the year 2002-03 shall stand set aside.However, we notice that the appeal itself is restored to theTribunal, whereunder the Tribunal has to consider thecorrectness and validity of the CIT(Appeal)'s order except onmatters conclusively decided by this Court. We thereforedirect the Tribunal to consider the appeal with reference to theorder of the CIT(Appeals), which shall not be treated as setaside by this Court.
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)
(K.SURENDRA MOHAN, 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.