Rp/457/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax , Kochi v. Shri Arun David, Son & L/H Of Sri.c.p.david
High Court
18 Aug 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Rp/457/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax , Kochi v. Shri Arun David, Son & L/H Of Sri.c.p.david
Date of order
18 Aug 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Rp/457/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax , Kochi v. Shri Arun David, Son & L/H Of Sri.c.p.david, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Accordingly this review petition is dismissed.
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 THE AG.CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014/27TH SRAVANA, 1936
RP.No. 457 of 2014 ()
-----------------------------
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ITA.195/2011 DATED 04/02/2014.
.......
REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT IN ITA:
------------------------------------------------------------
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI.
BY SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON, SENIOR SC, ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC.
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN ITA :
----------------------------------------------------
SHRI ARUN DAVID, SON & L/H OF SRI.C.P. DAVID, CHEMBAKOTTUKUDIYIL HOUSE, KOTHAMANGALAM-686 691.
BY ADV. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR.
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-08-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
rs.
RP.No. 457 of 2014
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:-
ANNEXURE ICOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN ITA.191/2010 DATED 11/06/2010.ANNEXURE IICOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN ITA.195/2010 DATED 10/01/2011.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:-NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
rs.
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
O R D E R
A. M.Shaffique, J
This review petition is filed against the judgment dated4.2.2014 in I.T. A. No.195 of 2011.
2. Learned Standing counsel contends that this court did
not consider the effect of non-compliance of Rule 46A(3) of theIncome Tax Rules. In fact, such contention was urged by thereview petitioner before the Tribunal and the Tribunal hasrejected the said contention on valid and justifiable grounds.That apart, though such a ground has been raised, the same hasnot been urged before this court at the time of hearing of theappeal. In such circumstances, we do not see any error apparenton the face of the record for review of the judgment.
Accordingly this review petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
ASHOK BHUSHAN, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
Sou.
Sd/- A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.
// True copy //
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.