Rp/500/2019 Of M/S.chekkattu Chitty Funds v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 7TH SRAVANA, 1941 RP.No.500 OF 2019 IN ITA. 214/2012 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 214/2012 OF HIGH COURT OFKERALA DATED 13.11.2018 REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT: M/S.CHEKKATTU CHITTY FUNDSRAMANCHIRA, THIRUVALLA, 689 101. PRESENTLY-C/O. CHEKKATTU HOUSE, THADIYOOR P.O., THIRUVALLA 689 545, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER.BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.)SRI.ANIL D. NAIRSMT.NISHA JOHNSRI.V.P.NARAYANANSMT.DIVYA RAVINDRANSRI.R.BHASKARA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXSHASTHRI ROAD, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING,KOTTAYAM 686 001. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC,IT THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON29.07.2019, ALONG WITH RP NOS.492 AND 498 OF 2019, THE COURT ONTHE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.VINOD CHANDRAN & ASHOK MENON, JJ. ------------------------------------------- R.P.No.492 of 2019 in ITA No.212 of 2012,R.P.No.498 of 2019 in ITA No.70 of 2012 &R.P.No.500 of 2019 in ITA No.214 of 2012------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29[th] day of July, 2019 Vinod Chandran, J. Learned Senior Counsel Sri.T.M.Sreedharan appears for the review petitioners. 2.It is pointed out that the additions madeby this Court are not proper and that the Tribunal'sorder ought to have been upheld. It is alsocontended that going by the monetary limit, theappeals should not have been entertained. The nextargument is that the assessment itself is barred bylimitation. 3.As to the additions or disallowances made, the contention essentially is for re-hearing thematter. The confined power available for review isonly for correction of errors apparent on the face ofthe records. We do not see any such errors since thejudgment considered the various aspects and the lawon the subject to answer the questions of law framedin favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. 4.With respect to the monetary limit andlimitation, admittedly, no such ground was raised atthe time of hearing. The limitation question was not at all agitated even before the statutory authorities.In such circumstances, we do not find any reason toreview the judgment. These Review Petitions are thereforedismissed. No costs. Sd/-K.VINOD CHANDRANJUDGESd/-ASHOK MENONJUDGE jg RPs 492, 498 & 500/2019 APPENDIX IN RP NO.500/2019 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE ATRUE COPY OF WRITTEN SUBMISSION MADE INTHE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH.