M/S. ESCAPADE RESORTS (P) LTD. V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/218/2013

AI Insights

M/s. Escapade Resorts (P) Ltd. appealed against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, which denied certain tax deductions and confirmed interest levies for the assessment years 2001-02 and 2003-04. The main issues revolved around the deductions under Section 80HHD and Section 80IB, and the application of interest under Sections 234C and 115JB of the Income Tax Act. The High Court referenced several precedents, including judgments in similar cases such as Hotel and Allied Trades Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy CIT, to support its decision. After a detailed examination of the arguments and the Tribunal's findings, the court found no grounds to overturn the Tribunal's decisions and thus dismissed the appeals.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755711 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Hotel and Allied Trades Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy CIT (Assessment), Hotel and Allied P. Ltd. v. Deputy CIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: JOSEPH MARKOSE; V MARKOS; BINU MATHEW; TOM THOMAS; ABRAHAM MARKOS; ABRAHAM THARAKAN
• Keywords: Assessment; Deduction; Income tax appeal; Interest computation
• Section: 115JB; 80IB; 234C; 80HHD

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/8TH KARTHIKA, 1936 ITA.No. 218 of 2013 () ----------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 455/COCH/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 16-11-2012 APPELLANT(S)/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: ---------------------------------------------------------- M/S. ESCAPADE RESORTS (P) LTD. C/O. CASINO HOTEL, W/ISLAND, COCHIN-3. BY ADVS.SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE (SR.) SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.BINU MATHEW SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL) SRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS SRI.ABRAHAM VARGHESE THARAKAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/DEPARTMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------- ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE (1) ERNAKULAM. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-10- 2014 ALONG WITH ITA. 262/2013 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ITA NO.218/13 APPENDIX APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DT 29.07.2003 ANNEXURE B: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED IN THE APPEAL DT 22.03.2004 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) II. ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT 16/11/2012 PASSED BY THE ITAT IN ITA NO.455/COCH/2004. //True Copy// PA to Judge Rp ANTONY DOMINIC & ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JJ. =============================== Income Tax Appeal Nos. 218 & 262 of 2013 ============================== Dated this the 30th day of October, 2014 J U D G M E N T Antony Dominic, J. These appeals are filed by the assessee challenging the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in ITA Nos.455/Coch/2004 and 661/Coch/2007 concerning the assessment years 2001-02 and 2003-04 respectively. 2. There are three common issues that are raised in these orders. The first one is regarding deduction under Section 80HHD of the Income Tax Act. This issue is covered against the appellant by virtue of the judgment of this Court in Hotel and Allied Trades Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy CIT (Assessment) {[2007] 294 ITR 67 (Ker)}, which was followed by this Court in the case of Hotel and Allied P. Ltd. v. Deputy CIT {[2014] 361 ITR 184 (Ker)}. 3. The second common issue is in relation to deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. This issue is also covered against the appellant in view of the principles laid down by this Court in the judgment in ITA No.261/13. 4. The third common issue is in relation to the levy of I.T.A. Nos. 218 & 262/13 : 2 : interest under Section 234C which also is covered against the appellant in view of the judgment in Hotel and Allied P. Ltd. (supra). 5. There is an additional issue that is raised in ITA No.218/13. That issue is in relation to computation of interest under Section 115JB of the Act. On this issue, we have heard the learned senior counsel for the appellant and also the learned standing counsel for the respondent in detail. Having considered this contentions in the light of the findings of the Tribunal, we do not find any illegality in the conclusions warranting a different view of the matter. The appeals are accordingly dismissed. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE Sd/- ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE Rp //True Copy// PA to Judge "