IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2009 / 5TH ASHADHA 1931 ITA.No. 150 of 2009() --------------------- ITA.98/COCH/2007 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE: -------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/ APPELLANT/ASSESSEE:: --------------------- REHABILATION PLANTATIONS LTD. PUNALUR. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------- I.T.A. No. 150 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Ramachandran Nair,J. Question raised in the appeal filed by the Revenue is whether the tribunal was justified in granting exemption from payment of income tax on the income derived by the respondent on sale of centrifuged latex. Amendment was brought to the Income Tax Act in the year 2002. In fact Central Board issued circular stating that those assessees who have paid AIT need not pay income tax for any period prior to the amendment. The Department case is that in this case assessee has not paid AIT because of exemption granted by State Government. 2. We do not think the exemption granted by the government to the respondent which is under the government control entitles IT department to levy income tax because it is only waiver of collection of tax. The appeal is consequently dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb