IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 ITA.No. 574 of 2009() --------------------- ITA.61/COCH/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CALICUT. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): --------------- DR.A.V.ABDUL AZEEZ, 33/5755, TAMANNA, CHEVAYUR, CALICUT. ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN FOR R SRI.S.P.CHALY THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/11/2009, ALONG WITH ITA NO. 608 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K. MOHANAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- I. T. A. No. 574 & 608 OF 2009 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The question raised in the departmental appeals is whether the orders issued by the Commissioner under Section 263 of the I.T. Act are barred by limitation. Admittedly the period of limitation ended on 31.3.2004. It is the finding of the Tribunal that the order was despatched on 5.4.2004 which is beyond the period of limitation. It is the settled position that the order at least should be despatched on any date prior to the last date provided for completion of assessment. Since the Tribunal found on facts that the order was not despatched before expiry of the period of limitation, the Tribunal rightly upheld the claim of the assessee and cancelled the impugned orders. We do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. Consequently, departmental appeals are dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (V.K. MOHANAN) Judge. kk 2