IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1933 ITA.No. 7 of 2011() ------------------- AGAINST ORDER IN ITA.1018/COCH/2008 DATED 04/08/2010 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT ------------------------ M/S.KITEX CHILDRENSWEAR LTD., P.B.NO.5, KIZHAKKAMBALAM, ALUVA- 683 562. ADV. SRI.A.KUMAR THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ITA NO.7/2011 APPENDIX APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS ANNEXURE-A : COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) DATED 26/12/2007 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. ANNEXURE-B : COPY OF ORDER DATED 24/10/2008 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). ANNEXURE-C : COPY OF ORDER DATED 04/08/2010 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH IN ITA NO.1018/COCH/2008. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JJ. .................................................................... I.T.A. No.7 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. When the appeal is taken up for hearing, it is fairly conceded by the respondent assessee's counsel that so far as the first item of Rs.5,48,825/- is concerned, the matter requires verification by the Tribunal in as much as the Tribunal has not even verified that the assessee has prior to claiming bad debts accounted the same amount as income for any of the preceding years. So far as the 2nd item is concerned, i.e. payment allowed as business expenditure without furnishing any details the Tribunal allowed it based on assessee's arguments. Obviously, the orders of the Tribunal is not sustainable as the same is wanting facts but decided by them by relying on certain decisions in abstract. We, therefore, allow the appeal filed by the Revenue by setting aside the orders of the Tribunal and remand the matter back to the ITA No.7/2011 2 Tribunal for verification of facts and for rendering decision in a responsible manner. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jg