IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER FRIDAY, THE 26TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 4TH ASWINA 1930 I.T.A.No. 86 of 2008 ----------------------------------- ORDER DATED 11.5.2005 IN ITA.438/COCH/2002 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT/REVENUE: --------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (TAXES), SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR INCOME TAX & ADV.SRI.JOSE JOSEPH RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/ASSESSEE: ------------------------------------------------------------ SRI.B.MOHANACHANDRAN NAIR, MANGAD, KOLLAM. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ------------------------------------------- I.T.A.No.86 of 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 26th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. The Revenue is before us in this appeal, being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, in I.T.A.No.438 of 2002, for the assessment year 1995-96. The order passed by the Tribunal is dated 11th May, 2005. 2. The Tribunal while deciding the issues raised by the Revenue before it, had answered those issues following the dicta laid down by the jurisdictional High Court. 3. For the first time, after more than three years, the matter is coming up for admission before us. This was only because of the non- payment of the court fee by the Revenue. If for any reason, the appeal had come before us immediately after it was filed before this Court, our answer would have been to accept the reasoning of the Tribunal for the reason that the Tribunal had merely followed the dicta laid down by this Court. 4. Now it is brought to our notice by the learned counsel appearing for the Department that the view expressed by this Court is not sustained by the apex Court in the decision rendered in the case of I.T.A.No.52 of 2008 2 IPCA Laboratory Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [(2004) 266 ITR 521]. In our opinion, if for any reason the Department is of the opinion that the reasoning and conclusion reached by the Tribunal is contrary to the law laid down by the apex Court in the case of IPCA Laboratory's case, the Revenue has to make an appropriate application before the Tribunal, either for review or rectification of its order. 5. In that view of the matter, we decline to entertain this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. However, we grant liberty to the Revenue to make an appropriate application/review petition before the Tribunal for appropriate orders. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE vns