IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2010 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1932 OTC.No. 5 of 2010() ------------------- AITA.2/2008 of STAT ADDL.BENCH, KOTTAYAM .................... REVN.PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/REVENUE ------------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY JOINT COMMISSIONER (LAW), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. BY G.P. SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE --------------------------------- THE KERALA FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, KOTTAYAM. THIS OTHER TAX CASES HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ALONG WITH OTC NOS.7,8&9 OF 2010 ON 25/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... O.T.C. Nos.5,7,8 and 9 of 2010 .................................................................... Dated this the 25th day of May, 2010. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. These tax cases are filed by the State Government against a fully owned Government of Kerala undertaking under the control of the Forest Department. The issue raised is with regard to the depreciation allowed by the Tribunal in favour of the respondent. We are of the view that the filing of a case by the Government against a Government Corporation is a thoroughly ill-advised act because Government does not gain by depriving it's own organisation of depreciation benefits. Further, the loss or gain of the respondent-Corporation is fully borne by the State Government. A similar case namely O.T.C. No.6/2010 filed against the very same organisation was dismissed by us on 29.3.2010. Even though Government Pleader submitted that the issue raised here is different from the issue raised in the other case, we do not think there is any difference with regard to the issue arising in the case and what is important is whether the Government should be 2 encouraged to fight it's own agency. We, therefore, dismiss all these cases but with an observation that the question of law decided by the Tribunal need not be treated as a precedent in the case of other assessees atleast. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge pms