IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 ITA.No. 1063 of 2009() ---------------------- ITA.928/COCH/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,COCHIN BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): --------------- M/S.TRACO CABLE CO.LTD., KSHB COMPLEX, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-36. ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN FOR R1 SRI.TOMSON T EMMANUEL FOR R1 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K. MOHANAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- I. T. A. No. 1063 OF 2009 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard standing counsel for the appellant and counsel appearing for the respondent. Even though the Supreme Court has in CIT V. HCL COMNET SYSTEMS AND SERVICES LTD., (2008) 305 I.T.R. 409 (SC) decided the issue in favour of the assessee, the judgment of the Supreme Court is neutralised through amendment introduced to Explanation (1) to Section 115JB(2) with retrospective effect from 1.4.2001. By virtue of the amendment with retrospective effect, the decisions of the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal have necessarily to be vacated and we do so. The matter is remanded to the assessing officer for recomputation of liability based on amendment above referred. However, we make it clear that the assessee is entitled to claim deduction of debt in the year in which it was written off and if there was disallowance in those years on account of Tribunal's order, the 2 assessing officer will rectify the same for subsequent years. Appeal is allowed as above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (V.K. MOHANAN) Judge. kk 3